Re: gobolinux-users Digest, Vol 117, Issue 5

Thanks, I understand. It seems like a quite simple solution (elegantly
implemented), though I wonder if this "backward compatibility stuff" will
be here forever. Windows 7 faced a similar problem, and they have their own
solution to it, but the fact is that someday the old filesystem structure
will be discarded, and all apps will follow the new structure. And even if
that day is much further away than expected, it is still a valid future
prospect.

And btw, don't the BSD guys have a similar problem with software ported
from Linux? Does anybody have an idea how they managed it? I hope their
patches don't change every linux path in the source code to a BSD path...

Cheers,
Razvan


Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 12:00:37 -0200
> From: "Lucas C. Villa Real" <[email protected]>
> To: "[email protected]"
>         <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [gobolinux-users] More elegant than OS X?
>
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 6:40 AM, Liam Proven <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On 17 February 2015 at 21:53, Lucas C. Villa Real <[email protected]
> >
> > wrote:
> > > In GoboLinux we instruct the kernel about which directories (or
> symbolic
> > > links) we want to hide from user space application. By doing so at the
> > > kernel level we give a consistent file system view to applications
> > > independently of these apps being launched from a GUI or not. That is
> > why I
> > > state that our approach is more elegant. :-)
> >
> >
> > Or rather, you hide things more thoroughly than OS X does. I'm not
> > sure that better hiding == more elegant.
> >
> >
> It's not about "better" hiding, it's about consistency.
>
> Lucas
>

_______________________________________________
gobolinux-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-users