Branden Robinson writes: > Well, then, we immediately throw away the advantage that a single directory > name gives us.
What are those? > We already have several directories in our system that are unspeakably > unwieldy for a human to browse, why should /usr/share/images be any > different? A practice of historical misdesignes and disregard for scalability is no reason for perpertuating such stupidity on other parts of the system. Chris Waters wrote: > Perhaps, as an experiment, someone could put several thousand images > in single directory and see how the system reacts. I'd feel more > comfortable with some emperical evidence that this won't be a problem > before formally accepting the idea. I know exactly how the system reacts. Ext2 filesystem does a linear search to find filenames. I have 2600 files in /var/lib/dpkg/info, and an ls -l in there takes about 4 seconds, this on a Dual PIII with fast wide scsi drives. -- see shy jo
