Alex Bochannek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What do you have in /usr that you would like to join with /? If you > move all the stuff out that changes, what are you left with? Or is the > argument that / should be large enough that it can contain all the > packges you install and nothing should be changing unless it's an > install? Just curious.
There is a difference between files that are normally changed by the system and files that are only changed when an operator modifies the system, i.e. when installing packages or editing configuration files. For example, log files and databases are changed by the system, and should thus be stored in /var. On the other hand, binaries, static program data and configuration files should only be modified explicitly by the system administrator and may thus be stored on a read-only filesystem. This is how it is currently - you can mount /usr read-only and remount it read-write when needed. The argument is about the fact that there are, for example, two bin directories: /bin and /usr/bin. The same goes for lib and sbin. Why not store everything in the root directories (/bin, /lib, /share, etc.) instead? But when I think of it, perhaps there is one point in having /usr. It does make the namespace somewhat less polluted. All static data is collected in one place. And yet it isn't -- there's still /etc, /lib, /sbin and /bin. Hmm, confusing. /Pelle
