The point about mentioning browsers is that you don't generally look there. Unix convention is to only lead config (or otherwise hidden) files with a dot. If you do an ls -a, you're asking to see these files, so I don't see how they're polluting your namespace. I'm much prefer to have file metadata applied to all files in my ~/Downloads (along with some data from a brain hookup) so I know what the hell I was thinking when I downloaded some things as most of that pollutes namespace and I'm not sure whether to delete it (or where I found it in the first place if I do delete it and decide I want it again).
So, yep, I've got more dotfiles than regular files in my home directory, but somehow I fail to care. % find ~/ -maxdepth 1 -iname "[a-z0-9]*" | wc -l 50 % find ~/ -maxdepth 1 -iname ".*" | wc -l 77 But if someone can tell me where those 50 files and directories I look at all the time came from.... *That* would be awesome :) On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Hendrik Boom <hend...@topoi.pooq.com> wrote: > On Tue, 02 Jul 2013 16:06:17 -0500, Yaro Yaro wrote: > >> Package managers don't track .dotfiles. > > No, they don't. That, of course, is part of the problem. > > But it would be useful if packages were to have a standard format for > declaring what dotfiles the package is in charge of. Much like the way > packages declare their dependencies. > > This would be useful even if it were not enforced. It would give us a > clue. > They could put the info in description (which wouldn't be cool or some other place - you'd have to modify apt-file to quer;y for it) or a blank or template file in skel (no modification required but this would piss me off). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cah_obifj8gmpshvkndfgjx6eldtuywkcd6w1+028b_wejx_...@mail.gmail.com
