[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GNU System Explanation

From: Claudio Fontana
Subject: Re: GNU System Explanation
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:49:00 -0800 (PST)

--- "Richard M. Stallman" <address@hidden> ha scritto: 

> In my design, /packages is where you create the
> symbolic link
> to install a package.

Could you elaborate on this, as to avoid any

Please correct me where I am wrong:

/packages/package_name itself is a symlink.
It points to a real installation directory, which
contains only files pertaining to that package.
For example,

$ ls -l /packages/libtool-1.5.22
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root 19 Feb 8 23:58
/packages/libtool-1.5.22 -> /usr/local/libtool-1.5.22

$ cd /usr/local/libtool-1.5.22
$ find .

Then there's some magic at work (translator) that
joins all the stuff reachable via /packages and
exposes the result as managed directories /bin,
/share, /lib, ... which are read-only and writable
only by the translator.

However, I do not understand why the need for the
The packages could be directly installed in
/packages/package_name/ as a real directory, with the
same result. What am I missing here?

> I don't insist on that name.  However, I think the
> name "stow" is not
> meaningful and should be replaced with something
> meaningful.  If not
> "packages", then "installed" or "installation".

"packages" sounds better than stow, installed, or
installation to me.
Some alternatives:
"sw" [this one could stand for both software and stow]

But "packages" is already ok.



Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]