On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 08:17:25PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > Not quite. Redhat and others want to make this change (moving binaries > and libraries from / into /usr) not just for ease of maintenance (though > that makes sense too) but for several rather interesting reasons. It > would consolidate almost everything managed by the package manager under > /usr.
That's not interesting at all. > Configuration would live in /etc (with templates possibly provided by > packages, though more and more packages follow the "override files in /usr > with files in /etc" approach and ship no /etc configuration by default). That's the FHS and has nothing to do with moving things. > /var includes bits that change, which should not normally include > package-managed bits. That's also in the FHS. > This would make /usr easy to snapshot, easy to exclude from backups, > easy to share between systems, easy to mark read-only (mount --bind -o > ro /usr /usr) and various other fun possibilities. I don't think /bin, /sbin, and /lib are seriously blocking anyone from doing any of these things today. Indeed, people have consistently argued in this thread that /usr shared over NFS is not a useful thing to try to do these days, and there's nothing about adding /bin, /sbin, and /lib to /usr that changes these arguments. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
