username "frommie" instead of "lfs"?

Alex Groenewoud krisp at
Mon May 20 14:05:57 PDT 2002

(Sorry, I'm on a digest.)

It came From: Erika Pacholleck <pchllck at>
Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 16:31:58 +0200
Subject: Re: username "frommie" instead of "lfs"?
> [18.05.2002] Alex Groenewoud <-- :
> > In chapter 5 a user called "lfs" is created.  I find this slightly
> > confusing, because there is already a directory called lfs.
> >
> > Who comes up with a shorter and better name?
> lfs
> This is the shortest and most descriptive one.

It is short -- but we are good typers.
And descriptive?  Hardly.  This is just the scratch part, the building
of scaffolds, the things we throw away in chapter 6.

> People who are already confused by directory/ownership names should
> probably not use lfs at all.

It is you who wants fewer people to build LFS, instead of I, isn't it?

> Otherwise you must also change the user
> root because there is already a /root directory

There is, and it is the home directory of root, and therefore aptly
named.  But the home directory of user lfs is not /mnt/lfs.

> and never use the user
> bin because there are at least TWO /bin directories ....

That won't be a problem; no user wants to be called bin these days.
And of course all the bin directories are named bin, because that is
exactly what they are: full of binaries.

> Additionally LFS is leaving you to do whatever you like

I wish people would stop flinging this dead monkey about.  Of course I
can do what I like.  The point is: what is best *for the book*, what is
clearest, what makes the text ever so slightly more comprehensible.
And what about the good old design principle: to name differently things
that are different.


Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list