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

Re: Move all to /usr

Marco d'Itri dijo [Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 04:32:46PM +0200]:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
> I am still not 100% persuaded that this would be easy to do, but at
> least I think that it has more merit than the old "move all to /"...
> How much complex would it be to implement this in Debian?
> Would "mv /bin/* /usr/bin/" and making it a symlink just work, without
> the need to create temporary symlinks in every package as red hat plans
> to do?
> This reminds me a bit of the /usr/doc/ => /usr/share/doc/ transition.

I did not _thoroughly_ read the linked Wiki page, but did rad on the
follow-ups to your mail, and looked at bits of the Wiki page so at
least I know I'm not just ranting due to impulse.

IMO this proposal comes largely because, given that Fedora has a more
specific focus (desktop systems and serving as an experimental for
RedHat, which in turn is targetted mostly at servers), there is not
_that_ much of a point in keeping a minimal system... So they have
allowed themselves a degree of sloppiness:

   /usr on its own filesystem is useful in custom setups. But instead
   of the Unix way to (almost randomly) split-off tools from /usr and
   put them in /, and require more and more tools to move to /

I do not believe that description fits the bill for Debian. And this
is largely because a group of Debian Developers has historically kept
in mind the embedded systems scenario – And probably because we are
quite more anal-retentive regarding our policy.

A Debian system without /usr is useful. Give me the description for a
binary (or library FWIW), and I'm sure many people will give you (with
high correlation as well) whether it should go in / or in /usr. So,
no, I don't see we are having any sort of namespace pollution.


Reply to: