On 2 May 2018 at 10:47, Paul Wouters <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2018, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
>>>> It's already there. And it is XDG complaint. The question here is about
>>>> order (what takes priority).
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you point me to the XDG specification that requires it ? It was
>>> mentioned by Lenart on the bug, but he later clarified his comment[1].
>>
>>
>> So this came up again recently here:
>>
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/2017-August/013938.html
>>
>> (see the full thread)
>>
>> And I even promised to merge the proposed spec addition there, but
>> never actually did that. Maybe I really should now...
>
>
> Adding invisible directories to a user's PATH is putting esthetics over
> security and is the wrong thing to do.
>
> I have no problem with ~/bin/ but feel a bit reserved about ~/local/bin/
> as ~/local might not be obvious to the user as an added binary containing
> directory.
I guess this is to allow more than binaries. The ~/local seems to
allow for {lib, share, man} etc which would pollute a home directory
much more. [I dislike the hidden . part as I wasn't aware it was in my
path at all.]
> Paul
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
