| 1 |
On Fri, 6 Jan 2012 19:41:27 +0100 |
| 2 |
Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> * Micha?? G?rny <mgorny@g.o> schrieb: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > > I don't want to repeat all the arguments, why these |
| 7 |
> > > Windows-imitator guys are completely wrong, anymore. (IMHO |
| 8 |
> > > already been said in this thread). |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > Yes, having a single locations for all applications is so-windows. |
| 11 |
> > We should go the other way then, and create a separate prefix for |
| 12 |
> > every application. I wonder why we removed that awesome /usr/X11R6. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I was talking about other things, like giving up the typical |
| 15 |
> unix-style separation of subsystems, all the bloating happening |
| 16 |
> in certain DE's and then pulling down that bloat to the system |
| 17 |
> level (just starting w/ dbus) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Yes, three arguments and just a one, silly example which is basically |
| 20 |
incorrect assuming noone obliges you to use systemd. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> > > If upstream really wants to stick in that silly chance, it's time |
| 23 |
> > > for a fork. We're already allocating about 20..30hrs per week |
| 24 |
> > > beginning with 2012/2 for such a project in our resource plan. |
| 25 |
> > > This stupidity can become really dangerous thousands of systems |
| 26 |
> > > around the world, so it needs to be stopped. |
| 27 |
> > |
| 28 |
> > Wow, an enterprise fork taking 20-30 hrs per week to reimplement |
| 29 |
> > hacks necessary for running applications randomly spread over |
| 30 |
> > filesystems? |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> This is just our donation, I'm hoping others will join in. |
| 33 |
> For the actual development, half of the resources should be |
| 34 |
> fine, but testing dozens of uncommon scenarios will eat up |
| 35 |
> a multiple of that. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
I thought you reserved that much time for mailing lists. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
> > > BTW: the original argument (AFAIK) is that moving everything to |
| 40 |
> > > /usr should somehow make maintenance easier. Well, how actually ? |
| 41 |
> > > Perhaps for people who are too lazy to backup a few more |
| 42 |
> > > directories ? Silly. |
| 43 |
> > |
| 44 |
> > Enjoy sharing those few more directories over NFS. |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
> Yes, what's the big deal ? Done that with thousands of nodes. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Without initramfs? Syncing rootfs over and over again or just updating |
| 49 |
packages installing into it once a year? |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
> > > Actually, at this point, I'd raise the question why not dropping |
| 52 |
> > > /usr instead (in little steps). The impact is practically the |
| 53 |
> > > same (well, replaces the risk of unbootable system by the risk |
| 54 |
> > > of filling up separated / filesystems) but would remove an |
| 55 |
> > > then obsolete additional directory. ;-O |
| 56 |
> > |
| 57 |
> > That's because people would like to get rid of additional |
| 58 |
> > directories in /, not introduce additional ones. |
| 59 |
> |
| 60 |
> Aha. Then why not also moving /home, /etc and /var to /usr, too ? ;-o |
| 61 |
> (hmm, some mindless jerks really could pick up that silly idea...) |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
You should consider taking like 1 or 2 hours of your precious time to |
| 64 |
read about the use and meaning of various directories in the filesystem. |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
-- |
| 67 |
Best regards, |
| 68 |
Michał Górny |
Archives