Re: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec
Thomas Bushnell BSG dijo [Mon, May 09, 2005 at 03:08:57PM -0700]:
> >> If there is a reason to separate /usr from / (which so many people
> >> think there is, though I don't understand why, since it has no
> >> semantic significance at all), why separate /lib from /etc?
> > I don't see a semantic difference between /bin and /usr/bin (or /lib and
> > /usr/lib). IMHO, the only reason for /bin and /lib is that some programs
> > and libraries need to be available before is /usr is mounted.
> That doesn't make sense. If you get rid of the /usr vs / distinction,
> then there is no "before /usr is mounted".
As far as I have always understood this, there is an important
distinction: / should have everything needed for booting the system
into a mode that can be used to solve problems. This means, if you are
performing an installation on very reduced media, you only put / in
it, and /usr is network-mounted. This was quite a common setup some
years ago, and is still somewhat common.
Gunnar Wolf - email@example.com - (+52-55)1451-2244 / 5554-9450
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF