0

We didn't have a #unix-path tag until I just made one. (I hope I haven't made trouble by doing so.) The #PATH tag (all-caps) is specifically about the environment variable, but not what we refer to on a day-to-day basis, such as the path to a file.

Still, there are many questions about the paths:

See just one massive list of possible posts that could benefit from such a tag:

Should we have one?

If so:

  • This would be a meta question related to it.
  • What would the definition and scope be?
  • It should probably include canonical, relative, and absolute, right?
  • It should probably exclude $PATH from the already-existing #PATH tag, right?
  • What should it be called?

If we don't need one:

  • Why not, even with so many posts about the specific concept?
  • Seriously asking, how would it be problematic for our site to unify related questions?

1 Answer 1

4

The tag's excerpt says:

File name is a name used to identify a file uniquely on given file system.

To uniquely identity something in a filesystem, the full path is required, so I think this tag encompasses paths. At any rate, I don't see a need for separate tags for names vs paths (the only distinction between the two in a Unix system is, after all, that while both can't contain the \0 character, names in addition can't contain /), so if a new tag is made, they should be synonyms.

Questions would be better served by adding tags related to the context in which the path or filename becomes a problem.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .