Re: [MiNT] Re: location of GEM app configs an

[joska@nuts.edu (Jo Even Skarstein)]

On Mon, 24 May 1999 17:21:49 +0300 (EEST), Martin-Eric Racine wrote:

> > ?? Why is this a bad idea? And why must users have two copies of their
> > configuration-files?
> 
> Because, when switching between SingleTOS and MiNT/MultiTOS, the
> application will look for its configs in a different place, when
> $HOME is found.  Thus, we need 2 config copies.

Nothing prevents you from setting $HOME under TOS as well, the only problem
I can think of is that you keep your $HOME on a minix- or ext-partition.

> > Couldn't agree more. Except for the "until"-part, I would prefer to keep
> > the "one folder per application"-paradigm forever.
> 
> ...Which should include the configs.  Of course, if GEM apps also

But that means that it's impossible to have per-user configurations! What's
the point of having a multiuser-setup then??

> come with a proper install/remove script, then we could spread the
> configs and resources, without having to worry about anything.

For this to work properly the package-manager must keep a database of
installed apps, and if you move them around manually (or even rename their
folders) you'll screw things up. Sounds very much like Windows to me...

It's OK to use this concept with stuff that requries a certain directory-
-structure (like most unix-stuff), but I can't see any good reasons to make
GEM-apps more complicated. What can be gained by spreading files all over
the place?


/*
** Jo Even Skarstein    http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~josk/
**
**    beer - maria mckee - atari falcon - babylon 5
*/