Re: GNUstep.conf

[Chris B. Vetter]

On 11/3/05, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf <lars.sonchocky-helldorf@hamburg.de> wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 03.11.05 um 10:44 Uhr schrieb Chris B. Vetter:
> > Hello @list,
> > has anyone tried to bend the settings of GNUSTEP_XXX_ROOT such that
> > the GNUstep folders reflect the folder structure of OS X?
> > That is, for example instead of .../Local/Applications/ and
> > .../System/Applications/ just have ONE .../Applications/ (one
> > .../Library/ and so on).
> > Would there be any (negative) implications if you'd do so?
> I am for keeping the different domains (user, local, network) if you
> ask me (did you?) since it allows a fine grained supply of
> applications. As Einstein said: "make it as simple as possible but not
> simpler"

For clarification: I do/did NOT ask to have /Local and /System
officially removed.

I figured that since there is a system-wide GNUstep.conf that sets
GNUSTEP_XXX_ROOT, it would be an idea to play around with a more
OSX'ish setup -- on a personal setup.
After all, I guess that's (sortof) what GNUstep.conf is for, right? :-)

The question would be, IF you do that, what the implications would be.
As Alex P. already pointed out, some developers hard-code paths (baaad
idea) but other than that, is there anything else? Basically, does
GNUstep itself rely on a specific file/folder structure?

Frankly, I do not see a real point in having /Local/Applications AND
/System/Applications. There IS a point, however, with respect to
/Network/Applications.
But as Yves points out, having several Applications folder (local to a
particular machine) is kinda awkward.

On a side-note, since a user can use ~/.GNUstep.conf it would also be
possible to mimick the OSX'ish user home folder structure.

If you're not familiar with OS X' folder structure, take a look at eg.
http://osx.hyperjeff.net/Reference/fileStructureXServer2.php to see
what I'm talking about.

Cheers,

--
Chris