Hi
2011/7/27 Miloslav Trmač <mitr(a)volny.cz>:
(And of course, the thing to standardize would not be
"bin", but a
subdirectory structure as defined by the GNU standards for --prefix.)
I agree, it is precisely what I would like to see in a standard, a
home "GNU" prefix for installing projects locally (that is, /opt and
/usr/local are not an option).
Personally, I would be happy if my distro respect this home prefix by
default (not only for $PATH but for other envs that have lookup paths)
I don't understand the security risks. If something is allowed to
write to ~/.local/bin (or ~/bin etc..), then surely it's able to read
elsewhere or do something else nasty. Could someone detail it?
Making the directory "hidden" is just as reasonable as making
application data/config dot files/directories, like proposed by FHS.
The rationale is probably that $HOME is the place for user content,
and shouldn't be cluttered with "visible" non-user files/directories
(would be nice to put rationale in the specs)
regards
--
Marc-André Lureau