Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dotfile madness (2019)

0x46.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 185 posts

Re: Dotfile madness (2019)

#81

Post by codedokode »

bbkane wrote: post #53
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #33

What I personally find more egregious are dotfiles and dot-dirs on Windows , created by half-baked ports of Unix-first software (such as `ssh`). Windows has `%APPDATA%` and `%LOCALAPPDATA%` that are accessible with `ShGetKnownFolderPath`[0], using the appropriate `KNOWNFOLDERID`[1]; all programs should put their configuration and cache data in these paths. Windows also doesn't know what the dot at the beginning of a…

I prefer the app placing the config in the same place on every system. It makes it easier for me to find the file regardless of OS (to modify or back up with a script) and it's simpler for the app dev to write the code for as well. I recognize this is probably because I first learned about config files on a Unixy system, it's not the "native way" for Windows, and other people have stronger cases for their preference,…

> I prefer the app placing the config in the same place on every system.

That is impossible because in Linux there is no drive letters and you cannot have the same path to a file as in Windows.

Re: Dotfile madness (2019)

#82

Post by codedokode »

fiddlerwoaroof wrote: post #42
slondr wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

XDG has real practical benefits, though.

I personally hate the XDG directories. It’s annoying for different part of an application’s data to be split between `~/.config`, `~/.Cache`, etc. Rather than for all the data for the `foo` program to be in a file named something like `~/.foo*`

It is convenient because you can delete ~/.cache any time without losing configuration files.

Re: Dotfile madness (2019)

#83

Post by 8n4vidtmkvmk »

codedokode wrote: post #80
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #33

What I personally find more egregious are dotfiles and dot-dirs on Windows , created by half-baked ports of Unix-first software (such as `ssh`). Windows has `%APPDATA%` and `%LOCALAPPDATA%` that are accessible with `ShGetKnownFolderPath`[0], using the appropriate `KNOWNFOLDERID`[1]; all programs should put their configuration and cache data in these paths. Windows also doesn't know what the dot at the beginning of a…

I think "hidden" files are a bad idea. What's the point of hiding some of the files in a directory from user? It only makes things more confusing. For example the folder might look empty but in fact it could contain thousands of hidden files. You want to delete it as it is empty but accidentally delete important system files. Even worse, imagine if all files on an USB drive are marked as hidden. You see that the driv…

i just always list dotfiles for years now.. and my IDEs too. mostly a non issue.

Re: Dotfile madness (2019)

#84

Post by alwillis »

hyperupcall wrote: post #75
alwillis wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The following programs are for Linux only (The XDG Base Dir Spec isn't inherently followed for MacOS and Windows) You should fix this. While macOS and its system applications and bundled applications don't adhere to the XDG Base Directory Specification; many programs that run on macOS do. In fact, almost all of the programs you list run on macOS and (by definition) use the XDG Base Directory Specification. So I would…

Hmm, that's why I said inherent? Because as you mentioned there is a separate macOS directory structure and the system utilities don't follow the specification. Also, the specification is only written for Linux in mind, which is why I said "not inherent for macOS. Is there an exact phrasing you would prefer?

The short explanation is native GUI apps that use the macOS frameworks use the classic macOS directory structure.

The classic Unix utilities and apps typically use $HOME on macOS, while their modern, often Rust-based replacements—WezTerm, Exa, fd, broot, Fish, etc.—use XDG.

Vim uses ~/.vimrc while Neovim uses XDG.

Re: Dotfile madness (2019)

#87

Post by klodolph »

codedokode wrote: post #80
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #33

What I personally find more egregious are dotfiles and dot-dirs on Windows , created by half-baked ports of Unix-first software (such as `ssh`). Windows has `%APPDATA%` and `%LOCALAPPDATA%` that are accessible with `ShGetKnownFolderPath`[0], using the appropriate `KNOWNFOLDERID`[1]; all programs should put their configuration and cache data in these paths. Windows also doesn't know what the dot at the beginning of a…

I think "hidden" files are a bad idea. What's the point of hiding some of the files in a directory from user? It only makes things more confusing. For example the folder might look empty but in fact it could contain thousands of hidden files. You want to delete it as it is empty but accidentally delete important system files. Even worse, imagine if all files on an USB drive are marked as hidden. You see that the driv…

Hidden files on MacOS were used sparingly—the main instance of a hidden file is the file which stores an icon for a folder, if the folder has a custom icon. Hidden files are only hidden from the UI, they appear normally in the command line.

The standard Unix folders (usr, var, etc) are also hidden—to be honest, this is a compromise because the Unix filesystem hierarchy sucks, but we are saddled with it for backwards compatibility reasons.

I did appreciate the relative clarity of old macOS systems—everything in the OS was in “System Folder”, the rest of the filesystem was yours, and you could freely move applications without breaking anything, uninstall them by putting them in the trash, etc.

Re: Dotfile madness (2019)

#88

Post by transfire »

I’ve been a big fan of XDG for well over a decade. But I am yet stunned by how many big name projects still ignore it.

XDG is a great standard, but it seems it’s not enough. Probably time to abandoned home and put all personal files somewhere else — a subdirectory of home will do. And no standard name — call it what you want so no one can hijack it either.

Re: Dotfile madness (2019)

#89

Post by codedokode »

klodolph wrote: post #87
codedokode wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "hidden" files are a bad idea. What's the point of hiding some of the files in a directory from user? It only makes things more confusing. For example the folder might look empty but in fact it could contain thousands of hidden files. You want to delete it as it is empty but accidentally delete important system files. Even worse, imagine if all files on an USB drive are marked as hidden. You see that the driv…

Hidden files on MacOS were used sparingly—the main instance of a hidden file is the file which stores an icon for a folder, if the folder has a custom icon. Hidden files are only hidden from the UI, they appear normally in the command line. The standard Unix folders (usr, var, etc) are also hidden—to be honest, this is a compromise because the Unix filesystem hierarchy sucks, but we are saddled with it for backwards…

Hiding thumbnails cache is bad because a user might believe that the USB drive is empty and doesn't have any confidential data but the thumbnails cache might still have them.

There is no need to hide such files. Just display them as system files in Explorer.

> The standard Unix folders (usr, var, etc) are also hidden

Again there is no need to do it. Just move them to a directory named "System files".

Re: Dotfile madness (2019)

#90

Post by waste_monk »

codedokode wrote: post #80
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #33

What I personally find more egregious are dotfiles and dot-dirs on Windows , created by half-baked ports of Unix-first software (such as `ssh`). Windows has `%APPDATA%` and `%LOCALAPPDATA%` that are accessible with `ShGetKnownFolderPath`[0], using the appropriate `KNOWNFOLDERID`[1]; all programs should put their configuration and cache data in these paths. Windows also doesn't know what the dot at the beginning of a…

I think "hidden" files are a bad idea. What's the point of hiding some of the files in a directory from user? It only makes things more confusing. For example the folder might look empty but in fact it could contain thousands of hidden files. You want to delete it as it is empty but accidentally delete important system files. Even worse, imagine if all files on an USB drive are marked as hidden. You see that the driv…

>What's the point of hiding some of the files in a directory from user? It only makes things more confusing.

If a user doesn't know what .ssh/ or .bash_history are, and it can hurt them to accidentally delete or modify them, why show them by default? It's like training wheels on a bike.

>For example the folder might look empty but in fact it could contain thousands of hidden files. You want to delete it as it is empty but accidentally delete important system files.

If it is possible for a regular user to accidentally brick a system like this, it was doomed to begin with. If a user doesn't know what a dotfile is they shouldn't have administrative privileges, and if they do get them there is no safeguard to stop them destroying the system. It's not a dotfile issue.

>Imagine if you have a project and want to edit an .env file. But as dotfiles are hidden in Linux you don't see this file and cannot open it. It turns out that Windows Explorer which doesn't hide dotfiles is much better for developing projects with Docker!

In what reality is someone developing software and building Docker containers who doesn't understand the concept of hidden files? Seems awfully contrived.

Post reply on HN