LOL
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| herzeleid Feb 15, 2008 11:30 AM EDT |
In the unix world, we call those directories. |
| ColonelPanik Feb 15, 2008 1:33 PM EDT |
Would a directory by any other name smell as sweat? This is a killer page, or is it just me? There was so much stuff here that I never knew. Handy reference. Something to pass on to other beginners. |
| tuxtom Feb 15, 2008 2:00 PM EDT |
It's a good page. I knew a few of them, but not all of that. Very useful. |
| NoDough Feb 15, 2008 2:32 PM EDT |
>> Would a directory by any other name smell as sweat? Umm, did you mean to misspell that or do your directories really smell as perspiration? |
| herzeleid Feb 15, 2008 2:34 PM EDT |
The /proc filesystem is a treasure trove of information - and they say linux isn't innovative. Other unices e.g. Solaris have a rudimentary /proc filesystem, but it's really rudimentary, and contains only process id information, at least last I checked - nothing like the wealth of data available in the linux /proc |
| jezuch Feb 15, 2008 3:17 PM EDT |
Quoting:The /proc filesystem is a treasure trove of information There's also /sys - but only for those of much courage :) |
| tracyanne Feb 15, 2008 4:32 PM EDT |
Quoting:In the unix world, we call those directories. If they are folders, then why is it Directories Services? |
| tuxtom Feb 15, 2008 4:40 PM EDT |
>> Would a directory by any other name smell as sweat? It's a hard working directory. |
| ColonelPanik Feb 15, 2008 7:33 PM EDT |
Carp, er cr@p, spelling is not among my strong points. But you can sort of translate what I post. And keep zinging me for it, I deserve it. |
| herzeleid Feb 15, 2008 7:43 PM EDT |
> If they are folders, then why is it Directories Services? There's a lot of ambiguity around terminology these days, just like the confusion over the two totally different protocols which are both called "secure ftp" - Personally, I would have side-stepped the possibility of confusion by referring to the subject of the article as "the /proc filesystem" |
| tuxtom Feb 15, 2008 8:49 PM EDT |
I'm not zinging you, Colonel, I think it became a brilliant play on words. And I agree with herzeleid...why get all worked up over semantics when we know darn well what we're reading and talking about anyway? I think they call attempting to win such arguments "leading by a chin". Question: It's easy to create an icon that looks like a folder, but how do you create an icon that looks like a directory? |
| gus3 Feb 15, 2008 10:02 PM EDT |
Quoting:Question: It's easy to create an icon that looks like a folder, but how do you create an icon that looks like a directory?A book with an old telephone receiver on the cover. Just don't color it yellow. |
| tuxtom Feb 15, 2008 10:14 PM EDT |
Enlightenment (courtesy of digg): http://turbomilk.com/truestories/cookbook/criticism/10-mista... |
| jezuch Feb 16, 2008 3:03 AM EDT |
I actually remember when Microsoft renamed "directories" to "folders"... Bad ol' days ;)Quoting:the /proc filesystem Actually it's "proc filesystem" - without the slash. "/proc" is a common mountpoint. /me loves nitpicking ;) |
| ColonelPanik Feb 16, 2008 6:33 AM EDT |
TT, I was laughing with you, and I never take offense at anything said here,
except when someone defends the products/company from Redmond. This /proc stuff is great. Those of you that are quibbling about the nomenclature have hit on a pet peeve of mine. Once long ago my first day on a new job, the most used item in our work was called by four different names by four different journeymen. I learned, just like I am learning the "terminology" for the Linux stuff. But it does confuse the noobs to no end. How much confusion does it take to send them to another OS? Case in point: SourceMage, http://www.sourcemage.org/ This distro is all about each person getting the distro he/she wants. I mean with SourceMage you can have it "Your Way". But look here: http://www.sourcemage.org/Glossary All I can say is LOL. tuxtom, your link is just what I am saying HYPERLINK@turbomilk.com] The same rules should apply for words as they do for icons. |
| tuxtom Feb 16, 2008 6:53 AM EDT |
OK, then we'll call them "places" instead of folders or directories. |
| herzeleid Feb 16, 2008 7:53 AM EDT |
> Actually it's "proc filesystem" - without the slash. "/proc" is a common mountpoint. You're right - I'd either say /proc or the proc filesystem but not the /proc filesystem - it's silly to confound a mount point with the name of a filesystem. I blame the late hour and the long day. |
| NoDough Feb 16, 2008 7:35 PM EDT |
>> OK, then we'll call them "places" instead of folders or directories. Hierarchical organizers of digital containers. :) |
| tuxtom Feb 16, 2008 8:06 PM EDT |
Pointers to block addresses on physical or virtual partitions. |
| hkwint Feb 17, 2008 4:56 AM EDT |
Quoting:Pointers to block addresses on physical or virtual partitions. That's just one possible implementation of directories, but the problem is it's not system agnostic, because it assumes the presence of partitions and pointers in first place. |
| tuxtom Feb 17, 2008 7:42 AM EDT |
What system doesn't use partitions and pointers at it's lowest level? |
| Abe Feb 18, 2008 7:17 AM EDT |
Quoting:OK, then we'll call them "places" instead of folders or directories. --- / for root --- Trunk (tree) for mount points --- Branch for directory --- Leaf for file Some one pick a synonym for fruit! :) |
| jdixon Feb 18, 2008 7:43 AM EDT |
> What system doesn't use partitions and pointers at it's lowest level? Some older file systems did not have partitions. I don't believe the original FAT system used on floppies did, for example. |
| Sander_Marechal Feb 18, 2008 7:49 AM EDT |
Quoting:Some one pick a synonym for fruit! :) Processes. Or executables :-) |
| Abe Feb 18, 2008 8:11 AM EDT |
Quoting:Processes. Or executables :-) I like that, Fruit for Process is Perfect. This should make it easy for the layman to understand the structure of Linux File System. Now let's work on changing the mind set. :) |
| tuxtom Feb 18, 2008 8:24 AM EDT |
> Some older file systems did not have partitions. I don't believe the original FAT system used on floppies did, for example. But it really has no relevance to /proc or the semantics of "directory" vs. "folder". While entertaining, this thread started as and will end as a useless academic digression. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!