Re: Filesystem Hierarchy Standard 2.0
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
David Frey <david@eos.lugs.ch> writes:
> This means, that /usr/share can be shared among architectures
> (Debian GNU/Linux), where /usr/bin/... is shared among machines with
> the same architecture (i.e. Debian GNU/Linux on i386 NFS mount
> /usr/i386/bin, Debian GNU/Linux on Sparc mount /usr/sparc/bin, where
> as all mount /usr/share on /usr/share).
Good summary. One thing I would like to emphasize:
In theory and logically, as you say "/usr/share can be shared", but I
would never suggest sharing it with NFS or whatever.
Disk space is very inexpensive and system administrators should
generally worry about larger (and more expensive) problems than how to
share a few megabytes between architectures they probably don't have.
Then why is /usr/share wanted? /usr/share encourages developers to use
architecture-independent file formats (because you do need to share data
sometimes) and it's standard on most modern Unix systems (BSD, GNU,
Solaris, and others all have /usr/share). Mostly the latter,
unfortunately, but it does serve to help clean out the rat's nest of
/usr/lib.
The point is that it's *logically* shared -- the data is fundametally
the same everywhere, but that doesn't mean you get to the same data
blocks everywhere.
Also, the thing about /usr having the capability to be read-only goes
about the same way. It's generally unnecessary to go to the extreme of
mounting it "-ro".
Dan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBNGl3P6kybebRDjw1AQGFnQQA2xbScF9x6LAFbaAgOkeiFmVd6kJ2OYCK
EYruIoMsUMK33bwb/PFmPi+hD4Rv5Buwk9IIonF14YMeIFixs0QsOGX+vnWuT0Oe
j3YxLsRVHAK6N8AA1Yqe2AMIplk7nZIfVu+lRN2Qq1O9LyNQm5dB88OhAf5RmoHE
4C4OT0+PwYw=
=azHg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: