Re: Virtual Directory Structure

[thristian atdot org]

On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 02:27:03PM +0200, Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero wrote:

<snip description>

> Aventages:
> - easy names (what really short names mean more or less, IMHO)
> - translatable (French, German...)
> - able to use old (or show in mix mode) if desired
> - not excesively virtual (you can print a guide in a sheet for those
> cases where it does not work, ie system recovery)
> - all apps will work, no low level requirements (all GNOME apps should
> use normal Unix names inside, but show new names if requested)
> - secure / conservative approach
> - can be created with some kind of global and user rules like
> s|/bin/|/Applications/|g or s|^~/mail/|^~/Mail/|
> 
> Problems:
> - hides a bit
> - does use " ", "_" and "/" like old style, so I guess people will
> tear clothes (I guess they are happy with interfaces that give no
> clues and do weird things, like some webpages)
> - new things are not automatically translated, you have to add some
> config to the system if new dirs appear, until then, a mix appears
> 
> Comments? Fixes? Direct discard? :]

What happens if one of the "friendly names" exists as a real
directory? For example, MacOSX's friendly names are actual folders on
the drive - including "Applications". If you mount a MacOSX drive
under Linux (It's UFS, after all) there *will* be an Applications/
folder, *and* a bin/ folder in the same place. To which will the
virtual "Applications/" refer?

-- 
,------------------------------------------------- ------ ---- -- -  -   -
| Screwtape | Reply-To: is munged on Usenet | members.xoom.com/thristian
|--------------------------------------------- ---- ---- --- -- - - -  -  
|
| This empty tagline? It's where my conversation piece used to be.
|