Suggestion for v3 - optional directory

[Guy]

I have some ideas which could be considered for version 3, or some future version.

1. The optional directory is no longer optional. It could be given a different name. What ideas do others have as to a good name for the optional directory? One idea is ext (for extensions).

2. If you include the tce=sda1 (or other directory) boot option, the tce directory is automatically created when you start Tiny Core. However, the optional directory is not created until you install extensions. It would be a good idea for this to be created automatically, particularly for updating Tiny Core, as the extensions can be copied rather than reinstalled. The natural reaction as it is, is to create or copy the optional directory using a root file manager. It then has the wrong owner and group, and you cannot install additional extensions. Having it created automatically avoids a potential trap for new users.

I am only making suggestions. I accept that others may have different ideas.

[helander]

Do we need two directories in 3.x ?

One way for TC to work could be:

   onboot.lst (and other .lst files) is stored in tce along with all .tcz, .dep, .md5 files
   in case no onboot.lst file exists all can work as before (all extensions loaded) for the
   ones that likes the previous model. In case a .lst is specified or if onboot.lst exists
   loading is performed according to that list.

The above way may might not work for all "audit" related use cases, but if it does, it could be one way that 3.x might work.

Regarding the namimg I agree that optional could be changed to something "better" and "ext" sound good to me . Even in the case of having one single directory I think that "ext" could be choosen as the name of that directory.


/Lars

[Guy]

Do we need two directories in 3.x ?

An ideal situation would be to go back to one directory.

I don't know what the plans are.

[gerald_clark]

I actually prefer to have the tce directory uncluttered.
I would prefer that it contain onboot.lst, copy2ram.flg, copy2ram.lst, and mydata.tgz.
Having config files mixed in with 200 data files makes them hard to see.

[helander]

Having config files mixed in with 200 data files makes them hard to see.

That's a valid reason for keeping the two directory approach

/Lars

[thane]

Agree with gerald_clark. Currently though I believe the copy2ram.flg file is in the optional directory with the extensions anyway.

[gerald_clark]

I know, and I wish it was not.

[Guy]

I actually prefer to have the tce directory uncluttered.
I would prefer that it contain onboot.lst, copy2ram.flg, copy2ram.lst, and mydata.tgz.
Having config files mixed in with 200 data files makes them hard to see.

It may be a good idea to create another directory within the tce directory, and put all files containing settings in that directory. That way they are all in one place and easy to find.


Taking this a step further.

Some settings are saved in the opt directory, and some settings are saved in the tce directory. Why not have a /tce/opt directory, and put all files from the opt directory, and all files containing settings from the tce directory, in this directory.

This can be linked to the opt directory.

All files containing settings (except home) will then be in one place.

If the opt directory is automatically saved in the tce directory, it eliminates the need for persistent opt.

It keeps it simple for new users.

[roberts]

Appsaudit GUI is used to maintain configuration files, not by manual methods. How can "difficult to find" be justified?  Optional means optional, i.e., not everything is loaded from such directory. There is the onboot option and the ondemand option both select from the optional directory.

Are we now at a "make work" requests state?  With complaints mounting about documentation, makes me wonder, how docs keep up if the base system is in a constant state of fux, let alone the issue of wait a week and everything will change again.

I would need more convincing that such efforts for such requests would yield significant results.

[gerald_clark]

I also run micro core on some machines without a GUI.
tce/optional just gets a bit cluttered.

GUIs can make things easier for the user. 
They need not do so at the expense of those not using them.
I am just expressing an opinion. No demands here.

[althalus]

I actually agree with gerald_clark here. Just because things are meant to be done through the GUI is no excuse for messy or cluttered directories. Extensions are NOT config files, therefore extensions do not belong in the same location as config files.

[roberts]

I think this is a Tiny Core thread not a Micro Core thread. Let me check...
Yes, indeed it is a Tiny Core thread.

As far as performance there is no difference. In Tiny Core there have been many questons on how to use...  If the posts and answers are referring to Micro Core or command line usage, then it does make it appear that Tiny Core is difficult to use.

Posts in the Tiny Core topic area that tell new users to make nested directories when a simple boot code should be used or claming it is difficult to find something when a GUI is there, give the wrong impression of ease of use.

I just changed from have double sets of everything, extensions, their deps, and their md5s as well as flags and lists and there was no complaints. Evolving to a single copy is still not enough.

It is one thing to make a suggestion another to make claims of difficulty because one chooses to ignore that which is provided.

It is not really helpful to always suggest the command line way, especially in the Tiny Core topic areas.
If you wish to disucss Mirco Core there is a topic area for such.

[gerald_clark]

I don't see why I am being jumped on for saying I like the directory structure the way it is.
I responded to a suggestion by Guy.

If you don't want calm discussion, I'll leave.