Bug#978636: move to merged-usr-only?
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 09:01:12AM +0000, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 at 08:02:06 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 09:22:29PM +0000, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > > Some developers seem to be using "merged /usr" to refer to multiple
> > > concrete layouts:
> > > 1. an arrangement where all regular files that have traditionally been
> > > in /bin, /sbin, /lib and /lib64 are physically located in /usr,
> > > with symlinks /bin -> usr/bin, /sbin -> usr/sbin, /lib -> usr/lib,
> > > /lib64 -> usr/lib64
> > > (this is what usrmerge, debootstrap --merged-usr and Fedora do; dpkg
> > > maintainer Guillem Jover refers to this as "merged /usr via aliased
> > > directories" which seems like a good unambiguous term)
> > Aren't there two sub-solutions?
> > 1a. with packages shipping files both in /bin und /usr/bin.
> > 1b. with packages shipping files only in /usr/bin.
> What precisely do you mean by "shipping files"?
"We allow packages to ship files". So either we force all packages to
only ship files in /usr/*, instead of e.g. /bin. Or we continue with
status quo, where packes may use either /bin or /usr/bin, which is part
of the current mess.
"That unit is a woman."
"A mass of conflicting impulses."
-- Spock and Nomad, "The Changeling", stardate 3541.9