Jens Staal <staal1...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with this. As an example distribution, Sabotage does things pretty > well. One detail that I like a lot (but it sort of depends on your stance on > symlinks) is the way applications usually are placed in it: > Each application gets its own directory under /opt and then installed files > get symlinks in / (the file system hierarchy is stali-inspired with > everything in root and usr just pointing back to root). > > For me, this is a nicer solution than for example pacman to keep track on > which files that belong to which package (no fragile databases needed).
One may use stacking bind mounts rather than symlinks. I know no decent such fs in Linux kernel space, as aufsn and unionfs seem cumbersome, but it ought to not be too difficult in user space, as 9p server. > What I have noticed lately is however how much of the broken stuff that are > expected to build also relatively fundamental technologies. For example, mesa > (which is needed if one ever wants to run wayland instead of X) expects > libudev to build, and if the version requirements will increase further that > will basically force systemd on peopole. Free software, captive society. > I am starting to think of this as the Fragile X syndrome, which usually refers > to a genetic disease causing mental retardation > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fragile_X_syndrome ). > I am starting to feel that Linux is having a serious case of its digital > variant. Ha! Nice. Anselm Garbe <garb...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm back in the game ;) Welcome back! It's your move.
