[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RES: /usr/lib vs /usr/libexec

Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org> writes:

> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> I do believe you've missed the point.  Splitting /usr from / helps in
>> a teeny percentage of cases, and most of the cases where it "helps"
>> that have been mentioned here, it actually doesn't.
> Well, I think it helps in the case of network mounting it; it is
> easier to mount a non-root FS than the root fs. Given this isn't a
> huge benefit, and isn't for a huge number of people either.

You can mount /bin from the network on top of a boot-time /bin.  It's
very easy.  "mount foo:.../shared-bin /bin" or whatever the syntax is
for your filesystem type.

> Well, I didn't ask for great levels of proof. I asked for /any/
> proof. The /usr split has already been done; it'd be more work to
> re-merge /usr and / than it would be to leave it the way it is. The
> same can't be said for libexec.

Actually, the Hurd has shown it's trivial.  "ln -s / /usr" is really
sufficient.  Then you can phase things out over time.

> Sharing the root fs is possible via special kernel support or via
> initrd. /bin I guess is doable alone, but would require some nice
> initrd hacking.

No hacking is necessary.  Sharing / is a bad idea, but sharing any
subdirectory is trivial.

Reply to: