Directory structures in the future and other things I want.

[Les Mikesell]

Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-03-28 at 12:04 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> 
>> I still think all reasons for having a separate /sbin are obsolete and 
> 
> See my comment about tab-completion in another mail. If somebody wants
> to clutter their PATH, more power to them, but it doesn't make sense for
> most normal users.
> 
>> Meanwhile, changing the default user path fixes 
>> the worst parts of the problem.  But then there is the alias business 
>> too...  Should someone who normally uses "su -" but forgets and does 
>> "su" be surprised to learn that rm really doesn't ask if you meant to do 
>> that?
> 
> Having /sbin and /bin doesn't have a thing to do with that, the
> difference is that in root's environment, "rm" is aliased to "rm
> -i" (get your facts straight before pulling examples out of your hat).

Errr, I know that. My point is that surprises are bad and thus 
environment differences that a user/admin didn't set up himself are bad. 
  And this is the same point as the main reason for fixing the PATH.

> For what it's worth, that inconsistency between normal and root user use
> of "rm" should go away, the sooner the better. Either have it
> second-guess the user all the time or never.

Yes, unfortunately given that surprises are bad, how can this ever be 
fixed without surprising someone?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell at gmail.com