Re: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec
Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> writes:
> Le mardi 10 mai 2005 à 10:21 +0200, GOMBAS Gabor a écrit :
>> On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 05:42:31AM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
>>
>> > > - / can't be on lvm, raid0, raid5, reiserfs, xfs without causing
>> > > problems for /boot.
>> >
>> > Why is that?
>>
>> Missing bootloader support.
>
> Which bootloader doesn't support reiserfs?
milo, alilo, silo, ...
>> $ du -sh /etc/gconf
>> 26M /etc/gconf
>>
>> That's 1/3 of my root fs. It's damn too much.
3.8M /etc/gconf
> Almost all the schemas were already moved out to /usr/share. We plan to
> move the defaults directory structure to /var/lib/gconf after the
> release - at least, the defaults brought by package; we have to keep a
> defaults structure in /etc for local modifications.
Some improvement but still way to big for my taste. Maybe /usr/etc
isn't such a bad idea.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: