Alan McKinnon wrote: > On 29/09/2013 18:33, Dale wrote: >>> that gnome is very hostile when it comes to KDE or choice is not news. >>>> And their dependency on systemd is just the usual madness. But they are >>>> not to blame for seperate /usr and the breakage it causes. >> If not, then what was it? You seem to know what it was that started it >> so why not share? >> > He already said it. Someone added a hard disk to a PDP-9 (or was it an 11?) > > Literally. It all traces back to that. In those days there was no such > thing as volume management or raid. If you added a (seriously expensive) > disk the only feasible way to get it's storage in the system was to > mount it as a separate volume. > > >From that one single action this entire mess of separate /usr arose as > folks discovered more and more reasons to consider it good and keep it > around >
That wasn't the question tho. My question wasn't about many years ago but who made the change that broke support for a seperate /usr with no init thingy. The change that happened in the past few years. I think I got my answer already tho. Seems William Hubbs answered it but I plan to read his message again. Different thread tho. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
