On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 19:37:26 -0400
grg wrote:
> even if only one is used at a time, the system still has two paths to
> the resource (which I'd argue is twice as many as a clean design
> ought to have...)
An argument that I would agree with in principle, but you have to walk
and merge /bin and /
On Sat, Jun 24, 2023 at 10:28:46AM -0400, Daniel M Gessel wrote:
> the bloat I was thinking of was all the scripts with workarounds
> to handle variations, not the few extra links on every system. A link feels
> kinda equivalent to one line of code, so if more scripts lose a line than
> links are a
On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 10:14:01 -0400
grg wrote:
> I agree usrmerge is a good thing, but I'd say it's actually adding
> bloat rather than trimming it: post-usrmerge there are (at least) two
> paths for every binary, two linkings for every library. pre-usrmerge
> there was usually just one on a given
On 2023-06-24 10:14, grg wrote:
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 06:49:40PM -0400, Daniel M Gessel wrote:
As a hobby software developer, I see the benefit: *nix isn't static, so
simplification is generally "a good thing". More power to those who use
Occam's razor to trim some bloat.
I agree usrmerge is
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 06:49:40PM -0400, Daniel M Gessel wrote:
> As a hobby software developer, I see the benefit: *nix isn't static, so
> simplification is generally "a good thing". More power to those who use
> Occam's razor to trim some bloat.
I agree usrmerge is a good thing, but I'd say it'
