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

Re: options: was Red Hat is moving from / to /usr/

On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 18:55 -0700, Gordon Haverland wrote:
> I'm a UN*X dinosaur.  I started using UN*X in 1984.
> I don't like this idea of folding /bin, /sbin, /usr/sbin into 
> /usr/bin.
> I think the reasons to segregate /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin 
> and anything in /usr/local/* still exist today.

Which reasons?  They changed from time to time.  Last time I looked,
on a Debian system /sbin did not contain statically-linked binaries.

> I want more segregation, not less.  Actually, I've wanted all the 
> config for /usr to be in /etc/usr (which is a symlink to /usr/etc) 
> for a long time.
> But, by the time anyone hear of efforts such as this, there seldom 
> seems to be time to stop them.
> Hence, my question is, if this continues to happen, what do we 
> move to for a kernel?  Free-BSD?  Plan 9?  Something else?  Is 
> anyone working on a migration scheme?

FreeBSD userland is largely a throwback to the 90s, so it's probably
just what you're looking for.

Plan 9 has precisely the unification you so hate.


Ben Hutchings
Computers are not intelligent.	They only think they are.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: