Jim Knoble wrote: > This is a problem the distributions need to solve. The LSB should not > `legislate' a solution. Let's spend our efforts doing things more > crucial.
I was relying to a post as to why to use /opt instead of /usr. Of course LSB cant really stop distributions from bloating /usr. Of course it can suggest a solution to the problem, and put forward argument that is supported by a concensus. > : To save disk space many things can be shared, as /usr/local > : should be local to a machine, /opt is the natural place for such > : sharing to occur. > > Actually, /usr/ is really supposed to be the preeminent sharable > hierarchy. That's why all the mutable stuff got moved to the /var/ > hierarchy (e.g, logs moved from /usr/adm/ to /var/log/, mail spools > moved from /usr/spool/mail/ to /var(/spool)?/mail/, etc.), and why > architecture-independent stuff lives in /usr/share/ while > architecture-dependent stuff lives in /usr/lib/. Putting `local' > system-specific binaries in /usr/local/ is nonsensical; then you end up > having to export /usr/bin/, /usr/lib/, and /usr/share/ separately (not > to mention /usr/X11R6/ and whatnot). Really?, I had always been under the impression it was to allow /usr to be mounted read-only. If /usr is supposed to contain an OS distribution, but /usr is also shared, I guess that makes Linux a distributed OS :) > Here's what should be done with /usr/local/: > > rm -rf /usr/local/ How about: [BASH]/usr$ ln -s /local . > System-specific binaries (and libraries and scripts and configuration) > ought to go in a completely different tree. Sun's /space/local/ would > work, as would a simple /local/ (which is what i use). <snip> > : Personally I think it would be good that if you accidentely > : destoryed your root partition, you didn't have to overwrite > : 500+MB of perfectly fine /usr during a reinstall. :) > > Machines, busses, and storage devices are all large and fast enough > nowadays that an extra 15 minutes and 500 MB are trivial. If you trash > only your root partition by mistake, those extra 15 minutes will help > you remember not to do again next time. If it's the disk's fault, you > really should be replacing the disk anyway. If it's because your > machine was cracked or trojaned, you ought to be spending too much time > trying to track down the unwelcome visitor to care about those extra 15 > minutes. Get over it. I disagree. > : NOTE 1: That said, if you want to mount /usr you might want a > : subset of /usr on your local machine for redundancy, so that if > : your network falls over you can still get a system running. > > Nothing that is required to get a system running without a network has > any business even being in the /usr/ hierarchy. If you need it to get > a system running, it needs to live in /bin/. Plain and simple. I meant running and usable. Things in /bin are only to be used to get a machine running so you can reconfigure it to work again. If your network has fallen over you don't have to reconfigure the client do you? Cheers, Daniel.
