[fhs-discuss] Split home directory for each user into two parts

[Karl Goetz]

On Mon, 9 May 2011 07:49:56 -0400
Randy Kramer <rhkramer at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday 06 May 2011 12:34:30 pm Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > On 05/06/2011 12:32 PM, Randy Kramer wrote:
> > > Hmm, should I file a bug in bugzilla requesting a reference to XDG
> > > in the /home section?
> > Good idea (assuming someone didn't beat you to it; do a quick search
> > first).
> 
> I decided to try drafting something here before creating a bug
> report (or adding something to bug 762).

> Here is what the current /home section in FHS says.

I would suggest we lift the purpose and insert it into your proposal
immediately after <proposed wording> (I agree with your comment about
giving it a check over though)

[cut]
> /home : User home directories (optional)
> 
> Purpose
> 
> A home is a fairly standard concept, but it is clearly a
> site-specific filesystem. [9] The setup will differ from host to
> host. Therefore, no program should rely on this location. [10] 
[cut]

> Here is some wording I'd propose to add to that section (under 
> Requirements, I believe):

> <proposed wording>

[add the cut in here]

> See also the XDG Base Directory Specification (at 

Then change the line above to be:
The layout of the home directory is standardised by freedesktop.org (at

> http://standards.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-latest.html), 
> which specifies directories for the separate storage of:
> 
>    * user-specific data files ($XDG_DATA_HOME and $XDG_DATA_HOME)
>    * user-specific configuration files ($XDG_CONFIG_HOME and 
> $XDG_CONFIG_DIRS)
>    * user-specific non-essential (cached) data ($XDG_CACHE_HOME)
>    * user-specific runtime files ($XDG_RUNTIME_DIR)
> 
> Although the XDG Base Directory Specification is specifically for GUI 
> programs, it may be a reasonable target for all *nix programs to

Personally I would lean towards "all FHS compliant programs" rather then
"all *nix programs" here. I note non-gui programs like clive
use .config too. Should we be saying its specifically for the gui, or
leave that to fdo? (Or even suggest it for both gui and not) 

> evolve towards.
> </proposed wording>

I definitely think you've got this going in the right direction.

> <digression>
> I'm a little surprised (well, that's not the right word, because I
> have read this section before, although it's been a few years) about
> how little it says about the purpose of /home ("/home is a fairly
> standard concept"), and the idea that "no program should rely on this 
> location"--it seems many programs do.
> 
> I'm wondering if the section is deserving of a more general revision?

I'd say so.
kk

> </digression>
> 
> Randy Kramer



-- 
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/fhs-discuss/attachments/20110510/de542b52/attachment.pgp