[gobolinux-users] IO Slaves Problem
nereusren at gmail.com
Fri Oct 21 22:57:31 GMT 2005
> And I must say that I'd rather have those "old-school" names in /S/Links
> and gobohide the "fancy" ones! I would actually propose that we move
> over to this, and the new unionfs sandbox (how's it going?) and then we
> can also get rid of share/Shared and just stick with share. There would
> then be a 1:1 relationship between the names under /P/*/*/ and /S/L/.
> Very nice and logical, IMHO!
The short directory names are not logical at all, and confer no
inherent advantages over the more descriptive, accurate, consolidated
names chosen for GoboLinux. As a user, I would hate to see the archaic
versions any more than I already have to.
I presume most/all of the Gobo devs agree, based on the article "I am
not clueless" at
More information about the gobolinux-users