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

Re: Merging / and /usr (was: jessie release goals)

On 07/05/13 17:17, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 04:56:04PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> If we do this, I'd prefer to make /usr a symlink to / on new installs
> I've always thought that myself, but it seems most folks who are pro
> merge tend to propose going the other way.

After "/usr unification", the files in /usr seem to have more in common
with each other than they do with the files in other top-level
directories. Compare "/usr unification":

    /etc    semi-static configuration
    /home   static/dynamic user data
    /run    transient system data
    /srv    static/dynamic service data
    /tmp    transient user/service data
    /usr    static package-manager-owned executables/libs/data
    /usr/local  static sysadmin-owned executables/libs/data
    /var    dynamic data

with what you might call "/ unification":

    /bin    static package-manager-owned executables
    /etc    semi-static configuration
    /home   static/dynamic user data
    /lib    static package-manager-owned libraries
    /lib64  static package-manager-owned libraries (on non-Debian)
    /local  static sysadmin-owned executables/libs/data
    /run    transient system data
    /sbin   static package-manager-owned executables
    /share  static package-manager-owned data
    /srv    static/dynamic user data
    /tmp    transient user data
    /var    dynamic data

Also, /local and /share have not previously existed at the top level
(except on Hurd, which I think attempted "/ unification" at one point),
but would be created by "/ unification". That's only cosmetic, of course.


Reply to: