I was wondering whether it was a bad idea to have a non-standard directory structure on my system.
The standard structure seems to be something like:
/home/$USER/ [$USER's home directory]
~/ [a shortcut for the above]
/bin/ [binaries (programs) that are accessible by anyone]
/sbin/ [binaries that are accessible only by the super user]
And so on and so forth.
I didn't like this system because it doesn't seem to allow much sharing of files between users. It can be done, certainly, but it just seemed a bit cumbersome. I am the only person who uses my computer in my house, and I wanted to have things like my music collection available for all users - when I'm root I still want to be able to hear it and you never know, I might one day have a guest user who also wants to hear some music. The structure I opted for is one where most of the files and stuff are stored in the root directory. It goes something like this:
/snd/ [where I keep all sound files, such as edited snippets, system sounds, etc]
/img/ [images. This directory is a categorised into subdirectories, a system that works well with Digikam]
/music/ [my music collection]
/downloads/ [downloaded files from the internet]
/backup/ [mount point for another HDD for when I back up. Which I haven't done for a very long time, come to think of it...]
/stuff/ [storage place for general crap]
/school/ [hey, I should be able to delete this soon!
]
That's pretty much the gist of it. All directories have permissions rwxrwxrwx (or 777) so that all users can use them. Can anybody see any problems with this - I know that most of the protocols that have been developed in Linux developed the way they did for a good reason and I don't want to find out why! (Not the hard way, anyway). For example, if I accidentally download a malicious program into /downloads/ have I circumvented the security measures inherent in the Linux system?
Does anybody else have a non-standard directory structure?