This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [HEADSUP] Let's start a Cygwin 1.7 release area
On Apr 4 19:18, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Apr 4 09:52, Brian Dessent wrote:
> > I have to say I don't understand this desire to decouple /bin and
> > /usr/bin at all. Having them as two distinct directories means:
> > [...]
> > For the second point I'd like to posit that the logic for having two bin
> > dirs dates back to old unix practices like having /usr on a nfs mount,
> > such that /bin was the only available thing at system bootup time. We
> > don't have any of that to worry about really, as nobody does that kind
> > of thing (I hope) with Cygwin. So purposefully bifurcating a bin dir
> > into two locations seems like it's just breaking things and creating
> > more work all in the name of blind emulation.
>
> I understand the point you're trying to make, but...
>
> I found it always a bit weird *not* to have a separate /usr/bin dir.
> One disadvantage we have is that a package which accidentally uses
> a leading dot in the path (./usr/bin/foo) getys installed into a *real*
> /usr/bin dir by setup. Personally I find it cleaner to have two dirs.
> One thing which bugs me is that installing stuff into external
> directories, which is quite normal otherwise (Windows: Every app
> has it's own dir under C:/Program\040Files, POSIX: /opt) is avoided
> in Cygwin just because people might run into trouble due to a lacking
> $PATH. Do we really need to avoid everything, just because it makes
> the average Windows user unhappy?
Having said that, I'd like to point out that personally, I don't want
to enforce the separation of /bin and /usr/bin. I think it would be
better in the long run, but if most people think it's better to keep
the current /bin==/usr/bin and /lib==/usr/lib layout, I'm ok with that.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat