On Mon, 27.10.14 16:53, Martin Pitt (martin.p...@ubuntu.com) wrote: > Lennart Poettering [2014-10-27 16:37 +0100]: > > After all, moving those files away from /etc doesn't really make > > sense on split-/usr systems anyway, as it wouldn't help monopolizing > > vendor data in /usr really... Or at least I think the --usr stuff is > > really about monopolizing vendor data in /usr, and if you have a > > split-/usr system then that goal is moot anyway... > > It still does make sense. On those systems, the "OS" == /bin, /sbin, > /lib*, /usr, /boot. Except for that it's pretty much like a single > /usr tree.
No, it's still a mess. Anyway, please let's try to design our stuff in a way that everything is nice and clean on systems where /usr is monopolized properly. And other systems shall be supported, but it's not what we pick the naming for. > I. e. with this one can still build system images with these dirs > being r/o, and it also avoids an architecture-specific and big binary > file in an otherwise "config file only" /etc. (Yes, /etc/ld.so.cache > is somewhat of an exception, but it's arch independent, text, and > small). /etc/ld.so.cache is not a text file. It's binary. BTW, after the hwdb thing you probably want to do something similar for the journal catalog database. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel