g4sra wrote on 16.11.18 21:19:
> The concept of which is at fault anyway, if root file system network
> support no longer required the merge should go the other way in any
> case, it is /usr/{bin,sbin,lib} that is depreciated.
>
> /usr/bin > /bin
> /usr/sbin > /sbin
> /usr/lib > /lib
>
> with the exception of special cases which are frequently abused by
> distros but are not supposed to be a part of the standard OS and should
> stay under /usr.
> e.g.
>
> /usr/local
> /usr/share
I once was on the same page, but have since changed my mind when I
realized that the other way round, i.e. /{bin,sbin,lib} -> /usr/...
actually to me makes more sense, as it keeps all the "static" files
that are part of the distribution neatly in one place. The only other
significant things left in / then are site specific configuration in
/etc and, if not already placed in a dedicated file system, persistent
variable data in /var.
This allows e.g. for things like rendering the entire "static" part
of the system effectively immutable simply by mounting /usr read-only.
(And yes, referring to other sub-threads, in that case one would
indeed have to mount /usr by means of an initrd, which is neither
brain science nor rocket surgery.)
Regards,
Urban
--
Sapere aude!
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
