Re: Bootup and package managment (and a small status report)

[Alfred M\. Szmidt]

       But it is needed.  One needs to have some place to extract all
       the files that are needed to make GNU boot, run, and be usable,
       and from there create symbolic links to what I call /stow.

   Every package needs to be somewhere, but there does not need to be
   a standard place to put them.  It would be ok to have a "default,
   usual" place to put them.

Right, and this was all that what I called /packages was.

   The name `/stow' is not clear and should not be used.  In my design
   I called this `/packages'.  Another good name would be
   `/installed'.

I still think that /stow is far clearer than /installed.  Users who
are already familiar with GNU stow, will understand directly what will
happen when you put a symbolic link in /stow.  But lets not worry
about this right now, we should have something that is usable first
before we consider these types of details...

       Why shouldn't /hurd be managed by unionfs?  Translators are
       installed there, it isn't much different from /bin or /libexec.

   There is no reason why we should use one directory for both
   translators and the Hurd executables.  /hurd should be used for one
   or the other.

I'm not sure what you mean by Hurd executables, but if I think you
mean executables that are just part of the Hurd, then they are
installed in /bin and /sbin (and some stuff in /libexec).  /hurd is
_only_ used for translators (which are also executables), and this has
always been the case.