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

Re: why are there /bin and /usr/bin...

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 02:47:56PM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On 16/08/2010 14:00, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > ]] "Perry E. Metzger" 

> > | In the embedded space, which I know a lot about, it is true that the
> > | root FS is on flash or other expensive media -- but it isn't like /usr
> > | is on cheaper media in such an environment, it is always part of the
> > | root fs anyway, so it makes no difference.

> > Take a look at the N900 where most of the user-installed applications
> > are on /home (well, /opt, but that's a symlink to /opt/home), which is a
> > 32GB eMMC flash, while the root file system is a 256MB NAND flash, which
> > is vastly more expensive.  So while the situation you are describing
> > might be common, it's not always true.

> To be honest, I'm not sure the N900 /opt debacle is really to be taken
> as an example. (and / and /usr are basically on the same media, when it
> comes to boot)

Yes, but *if* they had been following the FHS, putting /usr on the separate
disk would be the way to do it :)

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: