[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: No to StowFS!

From: Gianluca Guida
Subject: Re: No to StowFS!
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 02:24:57 +0100


(CCing to gnu-system-discuss)

On 2/2/06, Leonardo Pereira <leonardolopespereira@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was thinking about why we need to merge all packages on the root
> filesystem is this is not a requirement of POSIX. Posix uses PATH to
> determine where the executable files are, lib directories are setted on
> /etc/ld.so.conf, others directiories of packages are not important to the
> system at all, only to the package, so, it can be on the "package directory"
> inside stow. The unique directory that I think that will need to be merged
> is /include. So, instead a translator that merges all the filesystem, what
> we realy need is a translator to change PATH and emulates ld.so.conf, so,
> you will have a very organized directory structure without break POSIX
> compatibility.

I won't enter the discussion of this, but you can always try your own
idea using unionfs --stow.

Infact, I implemented the whole stowfs as a collection of unionfs
translating basic system directories like /lib, /bin, /etc, et cetera.
Thus, you can decide to merge a singular directory without any
modification to existing code.

I would still like to inform you that my hacks on stowfs stopped
because I failed to get a stowfs'd system booting, so if anyone want
to volunteer on finding a (_working_) way to get that system booted,
(s)he would be my hero.


It was a type of people I did not know, I found them very strange and
they did not inspire confidence at all. Later I learned that I had been
introduced to electronic engineers.
                                                  E. W. Dijkstra

reply via email to

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