an additional step is necessary
to get them to work without having to jump through hoops.
The only hoop is setting $PATH.
Everbody working with the shell should know what $PATH is.
If you do not know what a shell is, then fstools is nothing for you.
Actually, I did know just enough to get the $PATH added, but as you
pointed out, not in what you consider the right way, by adding the path
to .profile. In your comment on this you educated me, so that's how I
learn. Another post mentioned that your way of doing it is not necessarily
the canonical (that is, preferred; not the Ubuntu people) way, so now
I'm in doubt again.
Still, adding to the instructions how best to add the link to whatever
to $PATH
makes it easier for the less sophisticated to do the right thing without
too much
gnashing of teeth. And, adding some explanation of the why might even
give them
insight, and perhaps reason for other sophisticates to discuss with you
why you have it
wrong. Also interesting to read.
Better yet would be to package fstools as something that installs them
the newfangled debian/unix way with apt-get
fstools is free software: just do it.
I would if I could. I can't. In this I depend on people more expert
than me, and
I appreciate their contributions. Sorry.
In this connection let me mention the following.
You mentioned sw as a Stuttgart-written way to distribute software. I
happened to have
downloaded the executables swlink (or something), and tried to learn
what they are
doing. I saw it uses /etc/os-release, which is so well-named that there
is no doubt about what
it's good for but I did not know existed. It's good to know though.
But, the executable had no comments that I remember, so I could not
follow what it was
trying to do and I deleted it. I might have learned something from any
comments.
Nino
--
xubuntu-users mailing list
xubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-users
