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

Re: Move all to /usr

>>>>> Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> writes:
>>>>> On Oct 11, Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de> wrote:

 >> Rather complex, I'm afraid.  Especially as not all architectures
 >> even support an initramfs, AFAIK.

 > I doubt this, since the initramfs can be embedded in the kernel image
 > itself (and indeed it always contains one, it just is empty).  But
 > still, then these architectures would not support keeping /usr on a
 > standalone file system, which may be an acceptable compromise.

	I don't seem to understand.  / is used to be self-contained; one
	was still able run a “bare bones” system with just / (say, if
	/usr was badly damaged somehow.)  How an architecture could
	/not/ support having /usr on a separate filesystem.

	On the shore, I see no value in the whole idea of merging / and
	/usr.  Somehow, it reminds me a recent trend of moving graphical
	mode support (for the architectures generally capable of a text
	mode, as in: amd64, i386) from userspace (as in: X server) to
	kernelspace (as in: fbcon, Wayland.)

	Saving a dozen of bytes in ${PATH} doesn't seem like an
	astonishing idea, anyway.  What's the point, then?


FSF associate member #7257

Reply to: