It's not about finding applications, it's more about the ability to have multiple versions of the same package installed and used concurrently. Best you can have with FHS is something like /usr/bin/python3.8 vs /usr/bin/python3.9, and this requires package maintainers to manually support this. Most packages don't do this, so if you happen to need - just a random example - an ancient Firefox version installed separately, "traditional" solutions like rpm or dpkg won't really help you.

Plus, a different organization of the filesystem, where everything that belongs to a package is stored under the same base path, rather than being spread across the whole FS. I don't really remember GoboLinux ideas, but IIRC they had something about leveraging use of the filesystem as a part of package manager.

Yeah, I don't think that's a problem I ever run into. Also they claim:

> Say goodbye to the old problem of having the package manager complain that libXYZ is not installed even though you can see that it is there.

That is... also a problem I have never had.

I like the idea of GoboLinux just for giving a new take on something more streamlined (because yes, the FHS and de-facto systems before it have accumulated a lot of cruft), but I think it would be more productive for the GoboLinux folks to advocate for their system based on its own merits, not on semi-imagined faults of the more common system.

Being able to have multiple versions of programs and their dependencies (which would help avoid dependency hell) installed is a big thing! That alone is a really nice benefit of GoboLinux's system.

I read the "At a glance" documentation and came upon this:

> /bin is a link to /System/Index/bin. And as a matter of fact, so is /usr/bin. And /usr/sbin... all "binaries" directories map to the same place. Amusingly, this makes us even more compatible than some more standard-looking distributions.

This just feels wrong to me. I appreciate that Linux is all about choice, but I really wouldn't want this.