Directory structures in the future and other things I want.

[Casey Dahlin]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> Casey Dahlin wrote:
>>
>>> I guess this the real issue. What is a normal user these days? Why can
>>> a user get the equivalent of lsusb/lspci via Gnome/KDE but not
>>> normally as a user. Should those have been put in some 'protected'
>>> area so that their .desktop and executables are only available if you
>>> are root.
>>>
>>>   
>>
>> The approach you're using to the filesystem is wrong. We don't need 
>> to make it more accessible. We need to do the opposite. The user that 
>> can't handle unix file paths doesn't need to have the system changed 
>> to accomodate him. He needs to be kept inside his home folder where 
>> he can't break anything.
>
> This kind of misses the point that with the advent of the personal 
> computer the user became his own administrator.
>

For simple administrative tasks we create guis. Theres little reason for 
the user to be messing around with the rest of the file system even in 
more extraordinary circumstances.

>> It seems strange that the majority of the folder structure is the 
>> OS's business alone, but raw space is still very much in the user's 
>> domain.
>
> If you turn the OS into a black box appliance with no user-serviceable 
> parts inside you can do that.  Or, just expose unix's inherent 
> simplicity and let people use it.
>
>
There's nothing wrong with a black box as long as its easy to open. Joe 
user doesn't want to know how his computer works. He gets offended when 
you try to teach him and blames Linux for forcing him to acknowledge the 
physical realities of his machine. That's part of what's kept Fedora 
from pursuing Joe user for so long. However, we are now at the point 
where we don't have to compromise the system for power users to keep Joe 
user safe from his computer. We can have both, we just have to abstract 
the system rather than alter it.

--CJD