Re: udev and /usr
On Sun, 2009-09-06 at 05:01 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Sep 06, Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > It's normal that in the process of drafting a standard, people will take
> > into account the prevailing real-world practices, to ensure that the
> > standard will be useful. Once something *is a standard*, you don't
> > arbitrarily change what you're doing and claim that it still complies with
> > the standard because "the standard follows what Red Hat does".
> I am not claiming that this complies with the standard, just that it
> does not matter because if there is a wide consensus (which does not
> need to be unanimous) about this then eventually the standard will be
> updated to reflect it.
> Anyway, FHS also has examples of things changed long after they were
> adopted by everybody, like /var/spool/mail/ vs. /var/mail/.
I would ask a question to [FHS|udev-upstream|whoever] : What "smooth"
migration path do you offer for those millions systems that are
installed with a standalone /usr?
I am grateful to udev developers and maintainers. I remember what was
Linux before udev... (far too many "vim /etc/modules", MAKEDEV, chown
and chmod )
FWIW, I did some statistics on installation-reports (in my debian-boot
mailing list backlog).
48 reports has the string "% /dev"
18 reports has the string "% /usr"
That's 37% ! This statistics are probably biased, because people with a
single partition layout probably don't bother reporting their disk