Archives
Archives
| From: | Alessio Ababilov <ilovegnulinux@×××××.com> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-user <gentoo-user@l.g.o> | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Optional /usr merge in Gentoo | ||
| Date: | Sun, 18 Aug 2013 08:40:41 | ||
| Message-Id: | CAGbLXuUFeSWgvtWBJ7V-_VycBT4+=A1TGoOtv6=eUjbJTeMmXA@mail.gmail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-user] Re: Optional /usr merge in Gentoo by Nikos Chantziaras |
||
| 1 | 2013/8/18 Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.com> |
| 2 | |
| 3 | > I tend to agree. And I still wonder why it's called "/usr merge" if it |
| 4 | > only affects /bin and /sbin. If it's really a merge, shouldn't /lib also |
| 5 | > be affected? |
| 6 | > |
| 7 | Sure, /lib is affected. This was the idea of FreeDesktop.org's article |
| 8 | http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/TheCaseForTheUsrMerge/, |
| 9 | and so does my script. |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Optional /usr merge in Gentoo | Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org> |