Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

[William Hubbs]

On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 05:35:51PM +0000, Duncan wrote:
> Ian Stakenvicius posted on Tue, 03 Jan 2012 12:03:32 -0500 as excerpted:
>
> > On 03/01/12 11:51 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >
> >> For example, consider what happens when bash or all of coreutils
> >> migrate to /usr.
> >
> > ..well, when /bin/sh no longer exists then there -will- be issues,
> > system-wide, on a massive scale.  Unless shells or environments can
> > dynamically map that hash-bang to an appropriate interpreter (ie,
> > themselves) automatically.
> >
> > *shudder*..  I don't even want to think about the migration i'd have to
> > do to handle that change.
>
> FWIW, I was reading a review of [was it GOBO Linux?, some distro that's
> famous for reorganizing things much like MS does, a program files dir,
> etc], and it was said to still contained a /bin with only a couple
> symlinks, /bin/bash and /bin/sh, for this very reason.
>
> Of course fedora uses an initr* so real-root and /usr will be mounted at
> the same time, and they're doing a /bin -> /usr/bin symlink at least for
> now, so they don't need to worry about that in the short term either.
> Longer term, possibly they'll try to get rid of it, but I expect at least
> some form of /bin/sh and/or /bin/bash symlink to remain around for quite
> some time.

Yes, the symlinks will be around for some time for this reason, but,
/bin/sh will point to /usr/bin/bash, so you have the same affect if /usr
is not mounted since the symlink can't be resolved.

William