Re: from / to /usr/: a summary
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 09:41:37PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jan 27, Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Do I understand you correctly that an empty configuration file in /etc
> > will override its 'full' equivalent in /usr? I.e., just an empty file
> > full of comments saying "this is what you can do with this file" will
> > break some things?
> This is correct.
> > If so, are there some things in udev which intrinsically depend on that
> > behaviour?
> Documentation and consistency with all other distributions.
I wasn't trying to suggest Debian-specific changes. Upstream mistakes
(if they are that) should be fixed upstream, not in Debian.
> The only alternative solution which I consider acceptable would be to
> move everything back to /etc and then symlink the /usr/lib/ directory to
> the /etc/ directory.
> But I am sure that you can understand why this transition would be hard
> and messy for the maintainers of the affected packages at this point in
> BTW, I want to point out that Rusty Russell neatly summarized the points
> of the / to /usr argument: http://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=236 .
Yes, though it's a fairly silly representation of the "anti" side.
The volume of a pizza of thickness a and radius z can be described by
the following formula:
pi zz a