On 2/17/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > On 2/16/06, Stephen J. Turnbull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>/usr/share often is on a different mount; that's the whole rationale > >>for /usr/share. > > > > I don't think I've worked at a place where something like that was > > done for at least 10 years. Isn't this argument outdated? > > It still *is* the rationale for putting things into /usr/share, > even though I agree that probably nobody actually does that. > > That, in turn, is because nobody is so short of disk space that > you really *have* to share /usr/share across architectures, and > because trying to do the sharing still causes problems (e.g. > what if the packaging systems of different architectures > all decide to put the same files into /usr/share?)
I believe /usr/share was intended only to be used for platform-independent files (e.g. docs, or .py files). Another reason why nobody does this is because NFS is slow and unreliable. It's no fun when your NFS server goes down and your machine hangs because someone wanted to save 50 MB per workstation by sharing it. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
