Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

> > FWIW, grub.cfg is deliberately in /boot, rather than putting an > autogenerated file in /etc. (/boot/grub/menu.lst had its own problems, > as a partly-autogenerated and partly-manually-maintained file - a scheme > that might almost have been designed to create bugs.) Colin, I'd forgotten tha

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On 07/12/11 23:35, Colin Watson wrote: > Simplifications here belong at higher levels. For example, the > suggestion made somewhere in this thread that there's no good reason > for Firefox to require the full path to an executable to open a > resource seems like an excellent one. That's tracked in

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 11:26:01PM -0800, Dane Mutters wrote: > On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Dane Mutters wrote: > > I've seen a bit of this obscuring mentality creep into modern Linux > > (including Ubuntu), in the form of auto-generated /etc/ stuff--which isn't > > necessarily a bad thing, e

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

I accidentally hit reply instead of reply-to-all. My message is below the quote. On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Dane Mutters wrote: > > If you really care about end users and you think this is something that >> need fixing, then the proper way to do it is to: >> >> 1. create a fake /usr/bin/

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote: > On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 09:08:44AM -0800, Matt Alexander wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 09:15:11AM -0800, Matt Alexander wrote: > > > > Sure, using find or which, etc., c

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 09:08:44AM -0800, Matt Alexander wrote: > On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 09:15:11AM -0800, Matt Alexander wrote: > > > Sure, using find or which, etc., can be used to locate a particular app, > > > but that's not really

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

If you really care about end users and you think this is something that need fixing, then the proper way to do it is to: 1. create a fake /usr/bin/ where all binaries are available without breaking anything else. (this could be done by having a virtual filesystem of some sort that automatically fi

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Matt Alexander wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 09:15:11AM -0800, Matt Alexander wrote: >> > Sure, using find or which, etc., can be used to locate a particular app, >> > but that's not really the poi

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote: > On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 09:15:11AM -0800, Matt Alexander wrote: > > Sure, using find or which, etc., can be used to locate a particular app, > > but that's not really the point. Why not simplify things and put all > > binaries under /usr/b

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 09:15:11AM -0800, Matt Alexander wrote: > Sure, using find or which, etc., can be used to locate a particular app, > but that's not really the point. Why not simplify things and put all > binaries under /usr/bin? Then you don't have to teach users about silly > distinction

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Colin Watson wrote: > On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 02:40:31AM +0800, John McCabe-Dansted wrote: >> We could even enhance which to look in obvious places off the path (perhaps >> locatedb?)  and print the output on stderr if we really wanted to. > > Please don't - 'which'

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:02 AM, nick rundy wrote: > There are several situations where I need to find an executable. One that > comes immediately to mind is when I need to specify what program to use to > open an online stream and the program I want is not appearing in an offered I find it quite

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

My 2 cents. Let other distros do this first. Wait 5 years to allow problems to be sorted out. Then discuss again. -- A bug magnet El Dec 5, 2011, a las 12:15, Matt Alexander escribió: > Sure, using find or which, etc., can be used to locate a particular app, but > that's not really the poin

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

Sure, using find or which, etc., can be used to locate a particular app, but that's not really the point. Why not simplify things and put all binaries under /usr/bin? Then you don't have to teach users about silly distinctions like "Oh, see, if it's an app that's meant to be used by a System Admi

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

I don't know if the original poster has since learned this, but I think it's worth noting several things, in case the person coming over from Windows hasn't figured it out. (If this is a non-issue, please disregard this email.) 1) Linux/Unix executables don't have a .exe extension. Typically, th

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 02:40:31AM +0800, John McCabe-Dansted wrote: > We could even enhance which to look in obvious places off the path (perhaps > locatedb?) and print the output on stderr if we really wanted to. Please don't - 'which' is used in scripts and needs to preserve its current behavi

Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Thursday, November 3, 2011, John Moser wrote: > > find a binary? Here, I've solved this problem for you, completely. > It's easy. Do this: > > luser$ which ls > > luser$ which gnome-session > > luser$ which synaptic > > If it isn't in your path, then it's broken. Something strange has > We c

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 12:52:44AM +0100, Lanoxx wrote: > The discussion of /usr vs. / has also been in debian and the general > consens seemed to be that fedoras use case is not applicable to debian > because it would break compatibility with systems that dont have an > initramfs. It would also be

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

Hi, The discussion of /usr vs. / has also been in debian and the general consens seemed to be that fedoras use case is not applicable to debian because it would break compatibility with systems that dont have an initramfs. It would also be neccessary to move tools such as fsck and others into init

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Martin Pitt wrote: > nick rundy [2011-11-01 15:01 -0400]: >> I came to ubuntu from Windows. And one thing Windows does well is make it >> easy to find an executable file (i.e., it's in C:\Program Files\) > > In fact, Windows makes that really hard, as there is no s

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 3:01 PM, nick rundy wrote: > I came to ubuntu from Windows. And one thing Windows does well is make it > easy to find an executable file (i.e., it's in C:\Program Files\). Finding > an executable file in Ubuntu is frustrating & lacks organization that makes > sense to users.

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On 02/11/11 00:25, Marius Gedminas wrote: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 05:52:16PM -0400, Martin Pitt wrote: >>> Here's a link to an article that talks about Fedora's idea: >>> http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Fedora-considers-moving-all-binaries-to-usr-bin-1369642.html?view=print >>> >> That w

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 05:52:16PM -0400, Martin Pitt wrote: > > Here's a link to an article that talks about Fedora's idea: > > http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Fedora-considers-moving-all-binaries-to-usr-bin-1369642.html?view=print > > > > That would mean that we need to drop the possibi

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On 11/01/2011 01:42 PM, Jeff Hanson wrote: What annoys me more is the third-party use of both /usr/local and /opt. I would rather get rid of /opt. I consider /usr/local the proper place for anything not handled by a package manager. FHS has a very specific purpose for /opt and it's different

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

What annoys me more is the third-party use of both /usr/local and /opt. I would rather get rid of /opt. I consider /usr/local the proper place for anything not handled by a package manager. > From: Siegfried-Angel Gevatter Pujals > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 20:52:32 +0100 > > In case you installed

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

I do think Lennart's arguments in make sense. On 2 November 2011 07:02, nick rundy wrote: > There are several situations where I need to find an executable. One that > comes immediately to mind is when I need to speci

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

nick rundy [2011-11-01 15:01 -0400]: > I came to ubuntu from Windows. And one thing Windows does well is make it > easy to find an executable file (i.e., it's in C:\Program Files\) In fact, Windows makes that really hard, as there is no standard location for binaries. Each application ships its e

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

I'm not sure I agree that windows makes it easy to find executables. They have the same situation with "system" binaries in different places (/windows, /windows/system, /windows/system32, x64 vs i386 in different places, etc, etc. and even less justification for those choices. Regardless, what win

RE: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

m: jonat...@starlingcottage.co.uk > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 19:46:37 + > Subject: Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/ > To: nru...@hotmail.com > > On 1 November 2011 19:01, nick rundy wrote: > > I came to ubuntu from Windows. And one thing Windows does well is make it > > e

RE: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Fedora-considers-moving-all-binaries-to-usr-bin-1369642.html Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 20:08:27 +0100 Subject: Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/ From: gregor.shap...@gmail.com To: nru...@hotmail.com The Link to the deviant article returned a 404

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On 1 November 2011 19:01, nick rundy wrote: > I came to ubuntu from Windows. And one thing Windows does well is make it > easy to find an executable file (i.e., it's in C:\Program Files\). Finding > an executable file in Ubuntu is frustrating & lacks organization that makes > sense to users. Fedor

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

Hi, 2011/11/1 nick rundy : > And one thing Windows does well is make it > easy to find an executable file (i.e., it's in C:\Program Files\). This is a joke, right? > Finding > an executable file in Ubuntu is frustrating & lacks organization that makes > sense to users. You may find the "whereis

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On 11/01/2011 03:20 PM, Cosme Domínguez wrote: > > But it requires a lot of work that I think should start first in Debian. And, is already being discussed in Debian (lengthy thread): http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/10/msg00157.html Allison -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubunt

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

On Nov 1, 2011, at 15:01, nick rundy wrote: > I came to ubuntu from Windows. And one thing Windows does well is make it > easy to find an executable file (i.e., it's in C:\Program Files\). Finding an > executable file in Ubuntu is frustrating & lacks organization that makes > sense to users.

Re: Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

I think that's a good idea. But it requires a lot of work that I think should start first in Debian. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Ubuntu should move all binaries to /usr/bin/

I came to ubuntu from Windows. And one thing Windows does well is make it easy to find an executable file (i.e., it's in C:\Program Files\). Finding an executable file in Ubuntu is frustrating & lacks organization that makes sense to users. Fedora is considering a fix for this issue. I think Ub