On 2012-01-05 13:08, Alan McKinnon wrote: > I don't claim any special deep knowledge of these things, but a > superficial glance over the packages tells you a lot. udev is designed > to deal with any realistic device needs on modern systems - it's the > kitchen sink. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Fully agree... :-/
> mdev has a much narrower scope where things are considerably more > static. Currently it does have a more narrow scope, yes, but that can change, no? Although I'm not entirely convinced that a userspace dev manager is needed (yes, devfs on Linux was an utter failure but Solaris, Mac OS X, *BSDs use it[1] and done properly in Linux it should work just as fine)... 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devfs#devfs > As for re-arranging the fs layout, I think it was Canek in the last > thread that gave an excellent example of why this is needed. When > devices hotplug, or need to become active early on in the boot process, > they need to run code that can be located almost anywhere. It wouldn't > be fun trying to get a wireless keyboard going when it's start-up > script needs to get into /usr/lib/firmware and /usr isn't mounted yet. Yes, I understand the need for this but... how does a wireless keyboard work under bios/firmware (*efi)? Never tried one and never will... A computer without ports should handle such connections in firmware (analogy: You don't need software to drive a cable). > I do agree with collapsing the executable code in /usr into /, or > having /usr on the root partition. A separate /usr/{,s}bin is pretty > pointless and was never done for safety or maintenance reasons. It was > done way way way back when disks were small and a convenient hack was > to keep the OS on the boot device and user apps somewhere else on > bigger but slower storage (which often was remote). Hm... I find it quite elegant and flexible with the separation of / and it's various underlying directories. I guess we can agree on disagreeing here... although, I'm a bit surprised to see you as an admin defending the "new" way... Windows does have such a philosophy with putting everything system related into a directory (\WINDOWS)... Ultimately one can argue why use anything else besides Windows, it does the job reasonably well. > If /usr is local, what really is the point of having it separate > from /? Have you ever found a Linux system in any condition that could > not start just because the stuff in /usr was available? I haven't. > > Even the split between bin and sbin is arbitrary. It's only there so > that users can take sbin out of PATH and not have the screen cluttered > with endless junk when they tab-tab. It makes much more sense to me to > just have one single bin and lib location and shove everything into it. I'm not an admin of a large organization so what do I know... but, I still can appreciate the flexibility and "tidyness" it[2] gives you in a multi-user system. I also can see this from a security point of view ("keep the cool toys from the children")... I personally like it for my very local computer as well for the above reasons (flex./tidy). 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard What you are basically saying is that everything "we" have learned about computer systems should be abolished and we adapt the monolithic, "black box" philosophy of newish systems like Windows. That's how I interpret what you're saying (yes, I do know hardware has changed since the 60'ies but not that radically, IMO)... I tend to think of Unix as "Lego" where you have lots of little bits with clean(ish) interfaces with which you can build whatever you want. With the new philosophy it's more like buying an Audi A2 (for those who don't know it, basically all you can do is fill it up with petrol, oil and window fluid; anything else you need to take it to an Audi workshop). Maybe I suck at car analogies... :-P > Dunno about lazy old fart, but splog (snarky pedantic lazy old git) > definitely is. I think we decided that Neil is the lazy old fart :-) :-D Oh... I'm not that far behind unfortunately... so, I'm a "lazy, pedantic, oldish, ???". ;-) Best regards Peter K
