On 04/14/2011 02:55 AM, Simon Geard wrote: > > Yes, there's been a bit of discussion of this among the distributions of > late. Here's a couple of the links I've read on the subject... > > http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/05/msg00075.html > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/01/msg00152.html > >
Wow! Talk about not seeing the trees for the forest! Allow me to summarize: The tool we use to manage our system wasn't designed correctly, so we're going to redesign the system to accommodate our tool. Yep, perfect logic there. I sincerely hope that the comments against remote /usr were not made by anyone with authority as to the direction of Debian. That's not to say that progress need be hindered by backwards compatibility, but for very little gain and some potential loss, the argument was doomed from the start IMO. > While not universal, there seems to be a growing feeling that having a > separate /usr partition serves no useful purpose these days. The third > of those links gives a pretty good summary of that viewpoint. > As to compatibility with the FHS, distros seem inclined to ignore the > spec, on the basis that it's not being updated, and no longer reflects > reality (e.g no mention of /sys). Another discussion on that subject: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/02/msg00395.html > Same tired arguments. See my earlier post in this thread regarding udev specifically to see how it has been blown out of proportion. -- DJ Lucas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
