Re: Suggestion: Goal towards a cleanlinks compliant Ubuntu.

mikecorn Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:38:23 -0800

Symlinks are generally a disaster. They should either be made bulletproof (automatically deleted when target is deleted), or eliminated. Someone long ago thought that giving many names to one file was a good idea. It was not. It only compensated for, and contributed to, the directory and file chaos in Unix/Linux. Ubuntu has made its own contribution by making up its own rules about where to place some files, and then adding symlinks in the standard places. Did I just use the word "standard"? What standard?

Joel Bryan Juliano wrote:

On 12/22/06, Andrew Jorgensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 12/21/06, Joel Bryan Juliano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All Ubuntu applications should create directories that it needs, when it
> doesn't exists. Use locate function to search for a specific file and
> directories, and not rely on symbolic links.

I'm curious what evidence you have that searching for a file is better
than using a symlink.

Thanks,
Andrew Jorgensen

searching for a file using locate is better, because it doesn't depends too much on a static system, nowadays, systems are dynamically changing, upgrades, installations makes the system changes alot.
It's an approach towards system scalability, in terms of architecture, platform, etc.

Regards,
Joel

--
Carpe Diem

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: Suggestion: Goal towards a cleanlinks compliant Ubuntu.

Reply via email to