On Tue, 10 May 2011 08:15:57 +0100, Roger Leigh <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:47:25AM +1000, Karl Goetz wrote: > > On Mon, 9 May 2011 10:38:42 +0100 > > Roger Leigh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > From the FHS POV, I would like to suggest these changes: > > > • Permit /usr to be a symlink to /. This gives distributors the > > > option of unifying the / and /usr namespaces. This is a logical > > > consequence of keeping / and /usr on the same filesystem. In the > > > distant future it might be possible to eliminate /usr entirely, but > > > at this point it would be appropriate to have the option of making it > > > a symlink. > > > > Sounds like a good step. would we note that /usr could/should be > > deprecated, or would we simply save it for a future release of the FHS? > > It's probably a bit early for anything like deprecation. At this > point, I think giving distributors the option of making it a > symlink would be sufficient. My short term goal here is to allow > the debian-installer to provide the option of merging / and /usr > at install time by creating the symlink during initial bootstrap. > The actual packages will continue to use /usr to permit use of a > real /usr or a merged setup, so this should appear almost entirely > transparent to both users and distribution packaging.
Note that such symlinking doesn't require FHS changes; when FHS says a directory should contain something, that something may be a symlink to elsewhere. There may be other side-effects which require footnotes or modifications, however: someone will have to do a thorough scan looking for clashes. Rusty. _______________________________________________ fhs-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/fhs-discuss
