3 ms·

I gave in trying to control the home directory long ago, it's a complete free for all, there has to be at least a dozen common and different ways programs decid

by tomxor 5y ago

I gave in trying to control the home directory long ago, it's a complete free for all, there has to be at least a dozen common and different ways programs decide to store configuration and caches etc. I install my dotfiles globally into the system for the programs I care about with a simple shell script. Our desktops/laptops are usually all single user these days anyway, I don't see the point in trying to constrain things to a home directory. The nice things about this is that I can nuke my home directory when I feel like it, this is especially useful for programs I just want to reset without figuring out where they've littered all their configs... obviously you need to keep the dotfile repo outside of the home directory for that.

waheoo 5y ago
There is different ways people have done it but there is only one standard. Make issues on GitHub and hope for the best. Most of the time it's already a "I don't care, won't fix". Apparently people just don't care that I have .cache mapped to a tmpfs and they don't care that their cache stored in .config or .shitappdevelopersinc is thrashing my remote backups.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
> I gave in trying to control the home directory long ago, it's a complete free for all, there has to be at least a dozen common and different ways programs decide to store configuration and caches etc. This and the security free-for-all that programs enjoy come from a simpler, more naive time in personal computing. Personally, I think one of the few things mobile OSs get right[0] is the idea that applications cannot be trusted to behave and the default should be to keep them in their own little sandbox until the user says otherwise. Launch them in their own namespace with only the things you want them to have access to mapped in or redirected as per your preference. [0] I have issues with the implementation, but the idea is sound.

by tomxor 5y ago

waheoo 5y ago

There is different ways people have done it but there is only one standard. Make issues on GitHub and hope for the best. Most of the time it's already a "I don't care, won't fix". Apparently people just don't care that I have .cache mapped to a tmpfs and they don't care that their cache stored in .config or .shitappdevelopersinc is thrashing my remote backups.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago

> I gave in trying to control the home directory long ago, it's a complete free for all, there has to be at least a dozen common and different ways programs decide to store configuration and caches etc. This and the security free-for-all that programs enjoy come from a simpler, more naive time in personal computing. Personally, I think one of the few things mobile OSs get right[0] is the idea that applications cannot be trusted to behave and the default should be to keep them in their own little sandbox until the user says otherwise. Launch them in their own namespace with only the things you want them to have access to mapped in or redirected as per your preference. [0] I have issues with the implementation, but the idea is sound.