| 1 |
Hi Marek, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Perhaps I need to re-ask the question this way: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
What's the motivation for "merging" / and /usr? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I've seen arguments that it's a historic split, and to an extent this is |
| 8 |
true, however, having critical system recovery (and basic boot) stuff in |
| 9 |
/, on as small as possible a partition, with the bulk of the system on |
| 10 |
/usr makes a lot of sense for me. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Kind Regards, |
| 13 |
Jaco |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
On 2019/07/15 14:28, Marek Szuba wrote: |
| 17 |
> On 2019-07-15 12:38, Jaco Kroon wrote: |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
>> I'm personally using a separate /usr (On numerous systems) and other |
| 20 |
>> than one problem I've encountered this isn't actually currently an issue |
| 21 |
>> for me, and the reason this specific case was an issue was due to one |
| 22 |
>> single tool (which unfortunately I can't remember now) having been |
| 23 |
>> installed into /usr where I'd personally expect it to go into /. |
| 24 |
> The issue is not with *split* /usr, it's with the scenario currently |
| 25 |
> being adopted by many Linux distros (e.g. Fedora or Debian) in which |
| 26 |
> /bin, /sbin, /lib and /lib64 are symlinks to respective subdirectories |
| 27 |
> of /usr. The purpose of the changes at hand is, as described by floppym |
| 28 |
> in his initial post, to pave the way towards making merged /usr workable |
| 29 |
> on Gentoo for the average user. |
| 30 |
> |
Archives