6 ms·

This is a problem that libetc is supposed to help solve: http://ordiluc.net/fs/libetc/ http://ordiluc.net/fs/libetc/

by tyrmored 14y ago

malkia 14y ago
It also begs the question, why it was named "etc" :)
- napum 14y ago
  I'm guessing it's because /etc contains configuration files and dot-files are just configuration files. Or do you mean, why was /etc named etc?
  - deno 14y ago
    I think they meant the latter. Why is it /etc instead of, perhaps more obvious, /config or /settings?
    - malkia 14y ago
      If it was meant for configuration - probably it would've been - /cfg /ini /set /opt /flg /arg /prm (params) As someone said - naming things is the hardest!
  - petercooper 14y ago
    For the latter, a lazy copy/paste from Wikipedia: "There has been controversy over the meaning of the name itself. In early versions of the UNIX Implementation Document from Bell labs, /etc is referred to as the etcetera directory as this directory historically held everything that did not belong elsewhere (however, the FHS restricts /etc to static configuration files and may not contain binaries)."
- spitfire 14y ago
  You can ask this question for most of unix. Why /etc? Why /bin and /usr/bin? (Answer: At one time hard disks were very small and crashed a lot), why do we presume screens are black and white, etc, etc. Try to change any of it though, and a lot of luddites will come out screaming bloody murder. It's just not UNIX if it makes sense.
- noibl 14y ago
  Maybe the alternative was "..." :)
- szopa 14y ago
  The origins of /etc are lost in history. Wikipedia [1] says that at Bell Labs /etc was pronounced "et caetera," and contained files that didn't belong elsewhere. And it had the advantage over conf or misc that it was only 3 letters. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard
- agumonkey 14y ago
  my de-obfuscation attempt: etc > e.t.c > edit to configure. the .rc suffix has a nice history btw
  - raylu 14y ago
    What's the history of that?
    - agumonkey 14y ago
      Legacy of the runcom shell that let's you record sequence of commands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_commands http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_commands
deno 14y ago
That’s nice, shame it’s not maintained. On the other hand, one the goals of XDG is to differentiate between application cache, actual settings etc. If FooApp stores 2GB cache file in .foo, redirecting it blindly to .config just makes my backups that much harder.

This is a problem that libetc is supposed to help solve: http://ordiluc.net/fs/libetc/ http://ordiluc.net/fs/libetc/

malkia 14y ago

It also begs the question, why it was named "etc" :)

napum 14y ago
I'm guessing it's because /etc contains configuration files and dot-files are just configuration files. Or do you mean, why was /etc named etc?
- deno 14y ago
  I think they meant the latter. Why is it /etc instead of, perhaps more obvious, /config or /settings?
  - malkia 14y ago
    If it was meant for configuration - probably it would've been - /cfg /ini /set /opt /flg /arg /prm (params) As someone said - naming things is the hardest!
- petercooper 14y ago
  For the latter, a lazy copy/paste from Wikipedia: "There has been controversy over the meaning of the name itself. In early versions of the UNIX Implementation Document from Bell labs, /etc is referred to as the etcetera directory as this directory historically held everything that did not belong elsewhere (however, the FHS restricts /etc to static configuration files and may not contain binaries)."
spitfire 14y ago
You can ask this question for most of unix. Why /etc? Why /bin and /usr/bin? (Answer: At one time hard disks were very small and crashed a lot), why do we presume screens are black and white, etc, etc. Try to change any of it though, and a lot of luddites will come out screaming bloody murder. It's just not UNIX if it makes sense.
noibl 14y ago
Maybe the alternative was "..." :)
szopa 14y ago
The origins of /etc are lost in history. Wikipedia [1] says that at Bell Labs /etc was pronounced "et caetera," and contained files that didn't belong elsewhere. And it had the advantage over conf or misc that it was only 3 letters. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard
agumonkey 14y ago
my de-obfuscation attempt: etc > e.t.c > edit to configure. the .rc suffix has a nice history btw
- raylu 14y ago
  What's the history of that?
  - agumonkey 14y ago
    Legacy of the runcom shell that let's you record sequence of commands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_commands http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_commands

deno 14y ago

That’s nice, shame it’s not maintained. On the other hand, one the goals of XDG is to differentiate between application cache, actual settings etc. If FooApp stores 2GB cache file in .foo, redirecting it blindly to .config just makes my backups that much harder.