Hallo,
* Michael Biebl [Sun, Jan 03 2016, 03:22:03AM]:
> Am 02.01.2016 um 22:08 schrieb Marc Haber:
> > On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 18:42:14 +0100, Geert Stappers
> > <stappers@stappers.nl> wrote:
> >> To me is this "TheUsrMerge" something like among
> >> * "it is hard too to explain to have /sbin/fsck and not /usr/sbin/fsck"
> >> * "there was a question about /bin/kill and /usr/bin/killall being inconsequent"
> >> * "we could not agree if p{erl,ython,hp} should in /bin or in /usr/bin"
> >> * "when calling `foo` we rely on $PATH. To avoid $PATH we call `/bin/foo`,
> >> to have a reason to rant it should be /usr/bin/foo"
> >> * "reverting a historic decission is much better then accepting a historic decission"
> >> * "just because we can"
> >> * "others doing also"
> >
> > Amen.
> >
> >> In other words: I don't yet see a _good_ reason for "TheUsrMerge".
> >
> > Seconded.
> >
>
> I see a lot of good reasons for "TheUsrMerge".
> So thanks for pushing for this.
And I, for one, don't really care. The last time I configured something
dependent on the usr split was about a decade ago, and even then it was
a kludge, for a problem solvable with a couple of minutes of extra
work.
The only thing {/bin,/sbin,/lib} are good for ATM is being and
information source, to see what's the really important s..t without
using extra tools.
OTOH UsrMerge breaks some habits, i.e. going to /share/doc/foo feels
weird. Which is a human issue, already spreading in the crowd of
anti-systemd lunatics.
Regards,
Eduard.
--
Sicherheitshinweis:
Achtung: Die grundlegenden Partikel dieses Gerätes werden durch eine
Gluonenkraft zusammengehalten, über die wenig bekannt ist. Ihr
fortdauernder Zusammenhalt unterliegt daher nicht der Garantie.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature