Re: /sbin link to /bin?
On Thu, Apr 01, 1999 at 10:57:47PM +0000, Michele Bini wrote:
> If the Hurd philosophy wants to ignore /usr, why not to
> ignore /sbin, too.
>
> [...]
>
> Leaving /sbin would make the filesystem structure
> simpler, too.
>
Another advantage would be that performance can
be a lot boosted once shadowfs exists and
supports asynch reading of different devices,
while the PATH dirs are scanned sequentially
(suppose having /sbin in a floppy and /bin in
a ramdisk /usr in a cdrom in stand-by mode
..., and /usr/local nfs-mounted).
Once we drop /usr, /sbin and /local
all the PATH stuff (and the relative conffiles)
becomes obsolete and can be dropped, too.
If we decide instead to keep /bin, /sbin, /usr,
even when we'll have shadowfs, the result,
expecially for a user without any Unix
experience would be confusing, as someone
pointed out in his reply.
Plus symlinking /sbin to /bin requires far less
changes to the system than symlinking /usr to /
(and, as Larry Wall said, laziness is virtue
for a programmer, and, maybe, for a sysadmin)
Compatibility with the current debian packaging
scheme can not too hardly be kept by chrooting
dpkg and non hurd compliant progs to a
/var/debian or /var/fsstd path which would have
proper translations to the root filesystem, so
that the root filesystem itself would not be
polluted by funny symlinks just for backward
compatibility.
-Michele
Reply to: