Paul Rogers wrote:
Since pcre-config is also installed and tells other packages the
library and links were installed in /usr/lib, wouldn't it be more
appropriate, safer, to leave them as installed and create "grep
links" in /lib here? I'm curious why you did it this way.
I'm guessing this is because the LFS book still supports the split
between '/' and '/usr'. FHS mandates that the system should be able to
bootup using only the binaries and libraries in '/' if '/usr' is a
separate partition.
Who *still* does that? I did it myself back in the day drives were
"small", but these days it's hard to buy a drive less than a terabyte!
(My history with computing is long enough *that* can occasionally cause
me to shake my head in disbelief!)
So, seriously, when is that done? I suppose sharing a /usr branch, but
I can't imagine wanting to do that over a network, ala NFS, so it'd have
to be all on the same system. Containers? (I don't *do* very esoteric
configurations.)
But even then, wouldn't it be better to use "./configure --prefix=/" so
everything stays where pcre-config knows it was put?
Paul, Remember that LFS/BLFS is targeted towards learning how to put
together a Linux system. I agree that from a practical standpoint that
there is no reason to keep /lib, /bin, and /sbin separate, but leaving
that in does demonstrate some techniques that may be useful to some users.
Removing support for a separate partition should be pretty simple. Just
create symlinks from /{lib,usr,sbin} to /usr/{lib,usr,sbin} and remove a
few mv and ln commands. Anyone who has built LFS/BLFS should be able to
do that without many problems.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
