Re: / -> /usr symlink
>>>>> M C Vernon writes:
MCV> (nb - I am not a compsci).
Don't worry... neither am I. ;)
MCV> I think to begin with we should have the /usr dichotamy, with
MCV> the intention to change it later, when hurd no longer has to
MCV> worry so much about being linux compatible.
After getting a good night's sleep and reading all the latest posts on
this subject, I agree.
You say elsewhere:
MCV> So: do I need to ask Gordon to recompile glibc including
MCV> /usr/lib as the default-rpath?
Yes, this is what I'll need to do. It's a simple change for me to
make, and I'll have to recompile glibc again anyway before I can
upload it to debian.org.
I think you put it best, in the least prejudicial way:
MCV> I think for the time being we should go with /usr not being a
MCV> symlink to / . I know hurd can have overlay directories and so
MCV> on, but this will just create difficulties in porting. We can
MCV> always change later, but I think keeping a linux-like feel for
MCV> the time being is a good thing.
I agree completely.
It will become obvious when getting rid of /usr will be a change that
we can make without offending other people. That time must come
sometime after shadowfs is working, which hasn't even been started
Until then, let's go with the dichotomy and relax. :)
I don't want to be the one to introduce unnecessary work into people's
lives, so I'll change glibc as soon as I can.
Gordon Matzigkeit <email@example.com> //\ I'm a FIG (http://www.fig.org/)
Lovers of freedom, unite! \// I use GNU (http://www.gnu.org/)
[Unfortunately, www.fig.org is broken. Please stay tuned for details.]