Re: devel files and libraries in /lib
On 2011-01-04 16:33 +0100, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 09:38:19AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>> | An alternative strategy to consider for the future: drop /usr entirely
>> | and place all libraries in /lib [as done on GNU/Hurd]. On current
>> | systems using initramfs the need for a separate / and /usr is gone.
>> | IMHO, there are nowadays few (if any) compelling reasons for having a
>> | separate /usr, and hence for having /usr at all other than as a
>> | compatibility symlink to /. Have we actually got any reasons for
>> | keeping it?
>> I'd love to see this happening and would like the ability to have /usr
>> as a symlink to / as a release goal for squeeze.
> In what way is it not already possible to symlink /usr to /?
There are packages which ship a binary /bin/foo and a symlink
/usr/bin/foo to it. Those will likely be broken, since you may end up
with only a broken recursive symlink.
> I think the issue is that not all users *want* /usr symlinked to /, and
> there's no benefit unless everyone switches to the new model. Which is
> rather awkward to enforce on upgrades; I don't know about you, but I have
> some continuously-upgraded older systems where my /usr isn't going to fit on
> my / filesystem.
It is not possible to do the switch on upgrades anyway, at least not
while every package ships files under /usr. You can only do that when
there are no packages installed that have files under /usr.