Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@×××××.de>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:46:42
Message-Id: 20120106184127.GE27854@mailgate.onlinehome-server.info
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr by "Michał Górny"
1 * Micha?? G?rny <mgorny@g.o> schrieb:
2
3 > > I don't want to repeat all the arguments, why these Windows-imitator
4 > > guys are completely wrong, anymore. (IMHO already been said in this
5 > > thread).
6 >
7 > Yes, having a single locations for all applications is so-windows. We
8 > should go the other way then, and create a separate prefix for every
9 > application. I wonder why we removed that awesome /usr/X11R6.
10
11 I was talking about other things, like giving up the typical
12 unix-style separation of subsystems, all the bloating happening
13 in certain DE's and then pulling down that bloat to the system
14 level (just starting w/ dbus)
15
16 > > If upstream really wants to stick in that silly chance, it's time for
17 > > a fork. We're already allocating about 20..30hrs per week beginning
18 > > with 2012/2 for such a project in our resource plan. This stupidity
19 > > can become really dangerous thousands of systems around the world,
20 > > so it needs to be stopped.
21 >
22 > Wow, an enterprise fork taking 20-30 hrs per week to reimplement hacks
23 > necessary for running applications randomly spread over filesystems?
24
25 This is just our donation, I'm hoping others will join in.
26 For the actual development, half of the resources should be
27 fine, but testing dozens of uncommon scenarios will eat up
28 a multiple of that.
29
30 > > BTW: the original argument (AFAIK) is that moving everything to
31 > > /usr should somehow make maintenance easier. Well, how actually ?
32 > > Perhaps for people who are too lazy to backup a few more directories ?
33 > > Silly.
34 >
35 > Enjoy sharing those few more directories over NFS.
36
37 Yes, what's the big deal ? Done that with thousands of nodes.
38
39 > > Actually, at this point, I'd raise the question why not dropping
40 > > /usr instead (in little steps). The impact is practically the
41 > > same (well, replaces the risk of unbootable system by the risk
42 > > of filling up separated / filesystems) but would remove an
43 > > then obsolete additional directory. ;-O
44 >
45 > That's because people would like to get rid of additional directories
46 > in /, not introduce additional ones.
47
48 Aha. Then why not also moving /home, /etc and /var to /usr, too ? ;-o
49 (hmm, some mindless jerks really could pick up that silly idea...)
50
51
52 cu
53 --
54 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
55 Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/
56
57 phone: +49 36207 519931 email: weigelt@×××××.de
58 mobile: +49 151 27565287 icq: 210169427 skype: nekrad666
59 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
60 Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
61 ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org>