From: UnixOS2 Archive To: "UnixOS2 Archive" Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:03:18 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 99 ************************************************** Monday 14 April 2003 Number 99 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Link support spotted in newsgroups : Dave Saville" 2 Re: eFDS-1.TXT : Steve Wendt 3 Re: Newbie : John Poltorak 4 Re: eFDS-1.TXT : Nicky Morrow 5 Re: Newbie : Nicky Morrow 6 InnoTek GCC for OS/2! : John Poltorak 7 Re: eFDS-1.TXT : Nicky Morrow 8 Re: Newbie : Nicky Morrow **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 08:46:30 +0100 (BST) From: "Dave Saville" Subject: Link support spotted in newsgroups http://mamodeo.dyndns.org/emx_link_support_04142003.zip Claims emx soft link support. Have not yet had time to look atit. -- Regards Dave Saville **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 17:11:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Steve Wendt Subject: Re: eFDS-1.TXT On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, Nicky Morrow wrote: > >1) Installers routinely create a subdirectory to create all of their temporary files, > >and then will wipe out the entire subdirectory. That way, they don't need to > >delete individual files. > >2) Some programs generate multiple log files, and thus use a subdirectory to > >contain all of them (mailman, for example). > > In the case of your item 1 above, it is planned/hoped to > integrate an installer into the os someday. An installer that maintains > a database of data for installed programs and system components. If we > are able to do this then should item 1 matter? Absolutely. You will never get everything to use the bundled installer. > In the case of item 2, > the new eCS installer generates dozens of log files during installation > but it doesn't need subdirectories...it just needs good log file names. > Does Mailman really need to have a subdirectory or is that just the way Well, it certainly keeps things organized much better. /var/log can get full of stuff if you are running lots of daemons. On a RedHat 8 machine here, I see these directories: cups, gdm, httpd, mailman, rcd, samba, squid, and vbox. It is running httpd (apache), mailman, and samba, and each of those have over a dozen files in each. Even with this separation, there are still a several dozen files in /var/log. **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 17:15:16 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: Newbie On Sat, Apr 12, 2003 at 09:32:59AM -0300, Nicky Morrow wrote: > >UnixOS/2 is being developed to be as Unix compliant as it possibly can be > >and tries to adhere to whichever standards are deemed to be relevanat. > > > >As far as directory structures go, the main guideline is FHS, the File > >Hierarchy Standard:- > > > >http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ > > > > eFDS-1 is modeled after FHS. Another way of explaining why I'm here > is: I'm offering this group the opportunity to review, provide input > and even help edit eFDS-1 so as to help prevent changes in eCS from > becoming roadblocks to the effort here. Another way of looking at is: > eFDS-1 is not just for users and sysadmins but it is for the folks > working on eCS. If there are particular ways of doing business that > would make life easier for this group then providing input to the > document would be a good way to get your needs met. That is not to say > that there won't be conflicts...I'm sure there will be...but conflicts > we can resolve. It's when we aren't working together where the real > problems come in. In the long term I would like to see UnixOS/2 coming bundled with eCS on its own CD and I'm sure it will provide much of the software you get with a Linux distro. I suspect that UnixOS/2 can be generally self-contained although it would be nice if eCS used sensible default definitions for TMP and ETC such as %BOOTDRIVE%\tmp and %BOOTDRIVE%\etc. Having them under \mptn always drives me nuts and it's one of the first things I change when I'm installing OS/2. The other major location which needs to be sorted out is the root directory for users. I would suggest %BOOTDRIVE%\home. I would also like to see a standard PASSWD and GROUP file as part of an OS/2 install. Getting the format of PASSWD standardised is important since there already are a number of competing incompatible conventions and PASSWD is required by a number of apps. This is something we have been attempting to thrash out over the years and hopefully SSES will be able to incorporate PASSWD in some way and be as Unix compliant as possible. > Regards, > > Nick -- John **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 20:35:24 -0300 From: Nicky Morrow Subject: Re: eFDS-1.TXT Steve Wendt wrote: >On Mon, 14 Apr 2003 22:52:16 -0300, Nicky Morrow wrote: > > > >>>\var\log .log files (no subdirectories allowed) >>>\var\temp temporary files (no subdirectories allowed) >>> >>>You can't very well place this "no subdirectories allowed" restriction on >>>variable data. Sometimes it makes perfect sense to use a subdirectory. >>> >>> >>Give me a good example please. >> >> > >1) Installers routinely create a subdirectory to create all of their temporary files, >and then will wipe out the entire subdirectory. That way, they don't need to >delete individual files. >2) Some programs generate multiple log files, and thus use a subdirectory to >contain all of them (mailman, for example). > Steve, I'll go ahead and pull the restriction from those two directories based on your comments. Something to consider (and yes, I know I didn't explain things very well when I started this topic): Please view this document as a document that is looking forward into the future. Basically it is looking into the future while dragging the real world baggage with it. It is full of the goals we are chasing. You will see many items from this document already in eCS v1.1 but not all items can be implemented yet for various reasons. In the case of your item 1 above, it is planned/hoped to integrate an installer into the os someday. An installer that maintains a database of data for installed programs and system components. If we are able to do this then should item 1 matter? In the case of item 2, the new eCS installer generates dozens of log files during installation but it doesn't need subdirectories...it just needs good log file names. Does Mailman really need to have a subdirectory or is that just the way somebody decided to do it? I ask these questions to get good examples of where you think we should be going, not necessarily on "how it is done now." Thanks for your input. Nick **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 21:00:41 -0300 From: Nicky Morrow Subject: Re: Newbie John Poltorak wrote: >>>UnixOS/2 is being developed to be as Unix compliant as it possibly can be >>>and tries to adhere to whichever standards are deemed to be relevanat. >>> >>>As far as directory structures go, the main guideline is FHS, the File >>>Hierarchy Standard:- >>> >>>http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ >>> >>> >>> >>eFDS-1 is modeled after FHS. Another way of explaining why I'm here >>is: I'm offering this group the opportunity to review, provide input >>and even help edit eFDS-1 so as to help prevent changes in eCS from >>becoming roadblocks to the effort here. Another way of looking at is: >>eFDS-1 is not just for users and sysadmins but it is for the folks >>working on eCS. If there are particular ways of doing business that >>would make life easier for this group then providing input to the >>document would be a good way to get your needs met. That is not to say >>that there won't be conflicts...I'm sure there will be...but conflicts >>we can resolve. It's when we aren't working together where the real >>problems come in. >> >> > >In the long term I would like to see UnixOS/2 coming bundled with eCS on >its own CD and I'm sure it will provide much of the software you get with a >Linux distro. > The primary reason I'm here in this list now is to see if I can include the needs of this group into the eFDS-1 document. Please tell me what issues you have with the current file and directory structure and what needs to be done about it to make your life easier. I'm quite sure there are many thing in addition to what is already in the document. > I suspect that UnixOS/2 can be generally self-contained >although it would be nice if eCS used sensible default definitions for TMP >and ETC such as %BOOTDRIVE%\tmp and %BOOTDRIVE%\etc. > eFDS-1 does define the location and purpose of the tmp directory...it even adds a standard config.sys statement (you will find this in eCS v1.1). It is isn't %BOOTDRIVE%\tmp. Tell me why you want it this way. Concerning \etc. This directory is not included in the document nor is it planned right now. The folks who have provided input to this point do not like the idea of adding a \etc directory. Please explain to me what the \etc is and/or would be used for and why it needs to be in a particular location...and if not in the root what is an acceptable alternate location based on eFDS-1. Something to keep in mind: The four directories (\home, \var, \ecs and \programs) are seen as the ultimate end result...and the only 4 root level directories needed by the system. Certainly there are limitations in OS/2 that make reducing to only these 4 directories impossible right now but by reducing the amount of directories by 2-4 per year we will eventually get there. What do we gain by adding more root directories to what is a mess in OS/2? > Having them under >\mptn always drives me nuts and it's one of the first things I change when >I'm installing OS/2. > >The other major location which needs to be sorted out is the root >directory for users. I would suggest %BOOTDRIVE%\home. > This is already defined in eFDS-1 and will be part of eCS v1.1. See the definition in eFDS-1 and tell me if it meets your needs. > I would also like >to see a standard PASSWD and GROUP file as part of an OS/2 install. >Getting the format of PASSWD standardised is important since there already >are a number of competing incompatible conventions and PASSWD is required >by a number of apps. This is something we have been attempting to thrash >out over the years and hopefully SSES will be able to incorporate PASSWD >in some way and be as Unix compliant as possible. > I can add this to the eCS projects document. Can I get you to back up, give me some history on this issue and give me a very basic definition of what you want? Regards, Nick **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 21:23:36 +0100 From: John Poltorak Subject: InnoTek GCC for OS/2! I saw a very interesting announcement in os2news on os2bbs today. Check out:- http://www.innotek.de/products/gccos2/ -- John **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 22:37:40 -0300 From: Nicky Morrow Subject: Re: eFDS-1.TXT Arnstein.Prytz at jcu.edu.au wrote: >>In the case of item 2, >>the new eCS installer generates dozens of log files during installation >>but it doesn't need subdirectories...it just needs good log file names. >>Does Mailman really need to have a subdirectory or is that just the way >>somebody decided to do it? >> >> > >I think that from a philosophical point it is MUCH tidier to keep programs >as far away from each other as possible. Taking your argument further, >there is no real need for subdirectories under /programs provided developers >choose proper unique names for their programs and attendant files. They >already need to in order for the PATH, LIBPATH, HELP, etc statements in >config.sys to work. Under Unix/Linux the separation of programs into their >respective bin, man, var, etc directories are typically because these can >be located on separate partitions that allow read-only, read/write access. >How much separation is a matter for discussion, but I see no need for >preventing sub-directory creation under /var/logs /var/temp. > I have made this change in the document. I appreciate the input from you and Steve. Nick **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:00:37 -0300 From: Nicky Morrow Subject: Re: Newbie Arnstein.Prytz at jcu.edu.au wrote: >>The other major location which needs to be sorted out is the root >>directory for users. I would suggest %BOOTDRIVE%\home. >> >> > >I disagree here. My own philosophy is to install the operating system only >on the boot drive/partition. > From eFDS-1: \home - intended for variable, shareable files -- read-write -- may be made available on the lan -- does not need to be located on the host system -- does not need to be on the boot volume The wording is currently such that the \home directory *can* be on the boot volume but it can also be elsewhere. I agree with you that in most cases the best system administration practice is to place the /home directory in a volume besides the boot volume. What about this definition? Is this enough to maintain order but allow flexibility? > All program and user files are installed on >other drives/partitions. That way I can do a clean install/format of a new >OS version without affecting any of my program user files. Except for the >desktop being fried, of course. > That is an issue that needs to be dealt with as well. If you read eFDS-1 you'll actually find some guidance that is aimed at this issue. We actually need additional guidance...feel free to think about it and let me know. > At least all the files will still be there. > >I do not encourage anybody to pack everything into the ubiquitous c:\ >partition. I do not know how many times people around here (using >Windows) have been told by the IT support staff to re-install the OS after >a reformat, but backup all your user files first. They rarely know where >their user/program files are located on disk. > In eFDS-1 there is only one allowable directory where all data files and directories go: \home If you backup \home then you back up all variable data. \home\morrown\mozilla is where all my mozilla configuration data goes. I certainly have other directories under \home\morrown to store everything from picture files to text files. When I back up I back up \home and forget it. Regards, Nick