On 28 November 2011 17:08, Bjartur Thorlacius <svartma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Scripts have to be able to depend on command names; command line > interfaces are interfaces too. In theory, bin directories should > contain directories containing the actual commands.
Plan 9 does this to some extent. It's always seemed obvious to me that executing 'foo/bar' should refer to, say, '/bin/foo/bar', not './foo/bar'. So instead of having 'apt-get install' we ought to have 'apt/install'. I don't remember if Plan 9's concept of the path works in this way or not, but it definitely has subdirectories in '/bin'. This would be good if you have a certain namespace of many commands, like APT. And if you use APT a lot you could union-mount '/bin/apt' into '/bin' proper, so you could just 'install' stuff. cls
