3 ms·

Yep, the XDG Base Directory specification [0]. Specifically the $XDG_CONFIG_HOME variable. [0]: https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spe

Yep, the XDG Base Directory specification [0]. Specifically the $XDG_CONFIG_HOME variable. [0]: https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-latest.html https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-...

samesamebutsame 5y ago
The few things I have written always have the configs in here, seems like the polite thing to do without cluttering up home for the end user, but I can't help laugh when I look my own system and apps are storing gigabytes of data in there. It's not really a config folder anymore, more a misused general store for files.
- cturtle 5y ago
  Yeah, if an app were truly compliant it would store caches in $XDG_CACHE_HOME and data (icons, packages, sounds, images, level data, etc. required for behavior) in $XDG_DATA_HOME. It's unfortunate that not all apps follow it
  - account42 5y ago
    $XDG_CACHE_HOME makes sense as having a directory that you can just blow away without fear but the $XDG_DATA_HOME / $XDG_CONFIG_HOME split, while not entirely unjustified, causes more problems than it solves because a) it is not always clear what is data and what is config, b) peeople disagree on what is data and what is config and c) other operating systems don't make this distinction for application files so ported software is almost guaranteed to just pick one and call it a day - so in practice you have both config and other data spread between ~/.local/share and ~/.config.
heavyset_go 5y ago
That's a standard that apps need to adhere to. It doesn't stop apps from polluting $HOME[1]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30379890 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30379890
- account42 5y ago
  All standards are by definition something that needs to be adhered to and don't magically stop anything. If you want to force uncooperative programs to behave there are different tools for that.

samesamebutsame 5y ago

The few things I have written always have the configs in here, seems like the polite thing to do without cluttering up home for the end user, but I can't help laugh when I look my own system and apps are storing gigabytes of data in there. It's not really a config folder anymore, more a misused general store for files.

cturtle 5y ago
Yeah, if an app were truly compliant it would store caches in $XDG_CACHE_HOME and data (icons, packages, sounds, images, level data, etc. required for behavior) in $XDG_DATA_HOME. It's unfortunate that not all apps follow it
- account42 5y ago
  $XDG_CACHE_HOME makes sense as having a directory that you can just blow away without fear but the $XDG_DATA_HOME / $XDG_CONFIG_HOME split, while not entirely unjustified, causes more problems than it solves because a) it is not always clear what is data and what is config, b) peeople disagree on what is data and what is config and c) other operating systems don't make this distinction for application files so ported software is almost guaranteed to just pick one and call it a day - so in practice you have both config and other data spread between ~/.local/share and ~/.config.

heavyset_go 5y ago

That's a standard that apps need to adhere to. It doesn't stop apps from polluting $HOME[1]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30379890 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30379890

account42 5y ago
All standards are by definition something that needs to be adhered to and don't magically stop anything. If you want to force uncooperative programs to behave there are different tools for that.