-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- David Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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-----
