Some pertinent questions about Linux
 

Hi,
I have been a Linux user for over a year now. I have regularly used Red Hat linux from 7.3 onwards and have also laid my hands upon Mandrake 8.
There seems to be some nagging questions in my mind whenever I use Linux and through this disucssion I want to discuss those because this will lead to other newbies getting to know about Linux products which exists and which these people are not aware of.
So here goes:

1) Is it technically possible to come up with a distribution iof Linux which has more friendly folder names. I have this major difficulty of remembering (for example) which local directory is where. As an example, why do not we have a Directory called "Installed Programs" instead of /usr/local or other "geeky" names.
If there are some distributions which adhere to such conventions, them why has the big giants, like Red Hat, SuSe, Madrake etc not followed suit.

2) One of the biggest problems in Linux is the (perceived) unavailabilty of Installer Programs (like InstallShield). I know that much work has been done in this regard and most major distributions have come up with really neat stuff, yet whenever I download something from , for example, sourceforge.net, I have to do the usual "configure, make, make install" stuff. Not that its hard to do it, but things go bad when the make file throws all sort of errors. It would be better if some installer program can give users some meaningful messages

Let me start with these two questions as the beginning and see what the user input is. I will keep posting further "nagging" questions, in the hope that this thread does not become a "Winblows vs, Linux" thread

Thankx in advance...

Re: Some pertinent questions about Linux
 

Hmm.. I find the Linux filesystem has much more "friendly" folder names than the Windows system that for instance sticks user info into the C;\windows directory :rolleyes:. I prefer to stick to the logical Linux layout. You can always make a symlink to use a name you like that points to where it actually lies, but it would be sort of awkward
:D I love Gentoo and Portage! :D Rpm and the Mandrake gui thingy are sort of awkward to me, so I switched distros.

When a Windows install program fails, the messages aren't really any help to me for installing and getting it to work correctly. Do they really help you?

The Linux error messages actually helps me out to correctly install something, so I have trouble understanding your questions...

Well, neither Linux nor Windows necessarily puts all the files needed for a program in one folder to begin with.
Windows not only uses the Programs folder for the executable, but may also put a .dll file or two in (I think) \windows\system, besides making registry entries.
A Linux program may also have an executable, library files, man pages, configuration scripts, etc.
Some system tools are also not put in the same folder as regular user programs.
Having a "Program" folder to begin with is somewhat misleading since that may not be all there is to it. And then again, sometimes a program may be put in a folder by the name of the company that makes it instead of the name of the program.
Any file system is a bit confusing and one just needs to get the best of it.
Most package tools have a way to list the files the package has put onto your computer. Perhaps learning this would make finding some program files easier.
The ability to view and change the source is included with GNU licensed software. Often a person (or company) will package that software for easier install, usually on a narrower platform than the original source code can support.

I agree that working with a *nix type filesystem can be confusing at times, and that there is some work involved in getting software installed at times. but I would consider both of these part of "learning" to use Linux, not "things that must be change in Linux".
:)
IMO

C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\My Documents\Audio\wmx.txt

~/wmx.txt
or
/home/digiot/wmx.txt

Hm. I'll go with Linux on that score. /usr/local/bin is a lot easier to type than "C:\Program Files\Application".

But, sure, it's technically possible but would require you to create symlinks to everything, like fancypiper says, or edit every install script and more to make it match, or have everyone change their practices to match your system.

Installation do suck, though. But at least you can look at the scripts that do it and see what's going on sometimes. And, depending on who wrote the scripts, you sometimes get amplified helpful error messages, so I wouldn't really care for an "installshield" thing. Just a little more verbose error messages.

2damncommon's right on about things being stored under app names or company names or whatever suits anyone's fancy and about stuff getting dumped at random places. Program Files, Documents and Settings, Shared, System, etc., etc. Worse, hidden directories get dumped everywhere, sometimes on the root directory, which really annoys me. They basically get sprayed all over. And the registry is freaking evil.

The only change I might like to see is maybe that /opt thing taking over /usr/local and having X11 brought up to the root - I'd like to keep the GUI separate from the real system. Maybe less recursion - /bin and /usr/bin and /usr/X11R6/bin and so on - some repetition is necessary, but it seems like there could be less of it. What I mean is, I can see tinkering with stuff, but the principles of *nix are a lot more sound than Windows. Maybe rename /etc to /cfg. *g*

what a stupid thread-

If you have nothing constructive to say, don't post at all and just move on to the next thread.

Your post wasn't very constructive in itself, if you have nothing constructive to say, don't post at all and just move on the next thread.

Do you really understand the meaning of moderators on a forum like this?
I moderate. In which I did. Your post was very unconstructive as the rules state this:

http://www.linuxquestions.org/rules.php

And my post is very constructive, to prevent others like yourself from making very unconstructive posts and to obey/point out the rules we have in set for this site.

Yes. Actually, there's a person that is planning on starting such a distro with a different file naming system like you suggest, and you can find out more here

Hum, I am really glad that people are responding to my questions, no matter how simple they seem. And thats what I like about LinuxQuestions.org: we get everything about Linux here that we want.
Anyways, let me post some other thoughts:

1) Is there a standard for Linux GUI's. I have seen people who tend to get confused between KDE and GNOME. Things change (sometimes drastically) in terms of user menus and applications when one switches from KDE to GNOME.
I have been using RedHat 9.0 (out just last week) and the best thing that I liked about it was the consistency among Menu System. I wonder if we can have a body that can place some rules regarding such things (or is this against the spirit of open source?)

Thankx in advance....

The standard is that they run under X. :D

GNU/Linux is all about freedom of choice, so to a newbie coming from the world of choosing between Windows or Mac to the immense variety of choice available in Linux (remember, there is no software available for Linux is one line of FUD). How do you pick among it all? Ask and try and find out for yourself.

The water is fine and you can have your desktop tweaked to your likes and not what someone wants you to have.

:cool: Choice! :cool:

WM/DE selection can be confusing to a newbie used to the Micorsoft series of Desktop Environments. That is why most help is given in the form of commands in an x terminal, because the command line is the lowest common denominator between all distros. GUI click sequences/icons can vary greatly, but DKE/Gnome are highly customizable.

KDE and Gnome are just the big two. I am reverting to a simpler desktop as I just use a window manager (fluxbox) and hand edit my menus. My desktop is blank except for a tiny bar unless something is running. I love the slit and tabs. :cool:

You were talking about simple installs, well I know nothing simpler than installing from RPMs!

Just a simple : rpm -ivh pkg and voila...
Wanna disinstall? rpm -e pkg

Can you do that with InstallShield? NO!
You have to click lots of buttons for nothing!

As for DE, I like the way it is: you have the choice(unlike in Windows)...

Now it is my turn to ask a question.
You prefer all desktops to be as alike as possible.
Red Hat happens to provide just that.
Why do you think everyone else MUST have that also?
It is not AGAINST the spirit of open source.
The different desktops were started to provide things not available in other desk tops. There is no reason they must then be made all the same.
If you enjoy using a certain desktop, learn to use it (including customizing it the way you want). Why must everyone else use it also?

Cheers,
Tink

Hum,
Pretty nice comments. Nevertheless, we must recognize that if we have to make Linux the Desktop OS of choice we have to win people over from Winblows. That is the ONLY way Linux can make its mark. This, in my opinion, is possible if there is some conformity among Linux Distributions. I have seen people irked by the idea of the same OS (i.e. Linux) being offered with different 'flavors'. Freedom with Open Source is good, but it is something secondary compared to Security , stability , and ease of use as far as most of the ordinary, everyday users are concerned.
Remember, people and businesses do not like 'playing around' with one falvor one day and an entirely different flavor the other day.
Linux fans( like myself) would jump to that and say:"Use one vendor for your business like RH, Debian or SuSE). But then what if my customer is using another 'flavor' and I have to help him over the phone. Its almost impossible to do that if the whole Desktop is different form what you see on your screen that what your Customer is looking at. Yet again, Linux gurus would come out and say "Use the command line". Well, thats what we are talking about here: Ease of use.Isn't that the case?

Thankx in advance...