|
|
|
|
|
|
by gerdesj
52 days ago
|
|
|
Put it in $ProgramData for system-wide usage or whatever the user version is for individuals. A hidden file is exactly what I said initially - a daft local decoration. Instead of using a stream, this one uses an attribute instead. Put your data where it makes sense on the filesystem but don't dump arbitrary databases of information on there utilizing filesystem attributes because that is incredibly fragile. thumbs.db only makes sense if the client is Windows (and only from a particular version onwards, until it doesn't). In the real world (starting with my laptop, running Ubuntu) it does not make any sense at all and is just a pain. I don't want to see your thumbs.db or your weird ~{temp office files} either. Why do you insist on crapping on my nice neat file system? |
|
|
Right near the data it's derived from is the most obvious place, you know, and makes sense for most of the application developers (it may not "make sense" for you but so what).
> Why do you insist on crapping on my nice neat file system?
"Your" neat file system? What a quaint notion. Two thirds of the hierarchy inside of your $HOME belongs to the OS you use and the tools you use (not "your OS" and "your tools" — just because you use something doesn't make it yours, you know). Your data is yours, of course, but the disk space belongs to the system harness first, and to you second, and the same applies to the file and directory organization.
Or at least that seems to be the prevailing attitude of most of the software.
> thumbs.db only makes sense if the client is Windows (and only from a particular version onwards, until it doesn't). In the real world (starting with my laptop, running Ubuntu) it does not make any sense at all and is just a pain.
Wait, didn't Nautilus use to read thumbs.db if it was present in the folder? Or am I thinking of some other file manager?