1 |
On 01/01/12 03:53 AM, Sven Vermeulen wrote: |
2 |
> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 07:59:47PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote: |
3 |
>> The goal is to deprecate /bin, /lib, /sbin and /usr/sbin. My |
4 |
>> understanding is that they want to move software that is installed in |
5 |
>> /bin, /sbin and /usr/sbin to /usr/bin. Also, they want to move |
6 |
>> everything from /lib to /usr/lib. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> I don't like this one bit. Things used to be simple with the "split" between |
9 |
> /bin and /usr/bin (and its related directories), this isn't going to make it |
10 |
> more simple. |
11 |
|
12 |
I concurr. I will admit that I've been rather out of touch with what |
13 |
other distros are doing (and have been for ~3-4 years), but combining |
14 |
everything into /usr/bin just seems plain backwards and I am rather |
15 |
shocked that all the distros are moving that way. |
16 |
|
17 |
Has the LFH been updated?? Googling seems to say no, as the last mod |
18 |
seems to have been in 2004... I know that, technically, these are |
19 |
'userspace' programs in that they aren't kernel-space, but they're still |
20 |
'system' programs so to me it still makes sense for them to be on the |
21 |
'system' side of the filesystem hierarchy, doesn't it? |
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
> |
25 |
>> 3) Try to maintain things the way they are as long as possible. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> I'm all for this one. |
28 |
|
29 |
I second this too. IMO, unless the FSSTND matches the new proposal from |
30 |
udev/systemd/etc upstreams, then I think we should stick with what the |
31 |
LFH describes. It may be possible, too, on this basis, to file bugs |
32 |
against the upstreams to enforce compatible behaviour?? |
33 |
|
34 |
Of course, 'as long as possible' may depend a bit on what the timelines |
35 |
are.. I would hope that we can support existing behaviour for at least |
36 |
the next 6+ months? (at least then, if the Mayan calendar's right, the |
37 |
end of the world will keep us from having to implement the change).. |