1 |
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 5:02 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 22:21:11 -0400, Michael Mol wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> There is so much BS being spewed around this topic, I'm genuinely |
5 |
>> disgusted. It's enough to lead me to suspect that Linux, as a |
6 |
>> platform, is *dying*. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> It's not dying, it's evolving - with the associated growing pains. Of |
9 |
> course, that's not to say it couldn't evolve the way of the dodo. |
10 |
|
11 |
The problem is the lack of engineering sense. |
12 |
|
13 |
> |
14 |
>> The "true UNIX way" is about KISS philosophy. Keep it Simple, Stupid. |
15 |
>> Keep things small, well-defined and modular. Break things into |
16 |
>> components, keep the components small and relatively well-defined. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> That, IMO, is the problem with the current filesystem layout. The split |
19 |
> between / and /usr is anything but well-defined. Putting things in |
20 |
> different boxes based on their function is good practice. Doing it based |
21 |
> on some arbitrary size limit on the box is not. |
22 |
|
23 |
Except that's not what people are doing. According to what I've read, |
24 |
that was the original rationale a couple decades ago, but that hasn't |
25 |
been the driving case for it for a long time, and pointing to it in a |
26 |
modern context is silly. These days, you put things on different mount |
27 |
points because you want different underlying characteristics either in |
28 |
the filesystem or its underlying block device. |
29 |
|
30 |
The gripe about the filesystem layout strikes me as a "it works, but |
31 |
it isn't clean or elegant" complaint. That means changing it is change |
32 |
for change's sake. And we're going to experience these growing pains |
33 |
tenfold as the consequences of that play out. If I was comfortable |
34 |
with *any* other platform as much as I've been with Gentoo these past |
35 |
couple years, I'd be jumping ship immediately. |
36 |
|
37 |
> |
38 |
> It makes me think of Ubuntu's insistence on fitting their installer on a |
39 |
> single CD, even if it means omitting useful software or having the |
40 |
> installer sneakily download components in the background. |
41 |
|
42 |
-- |
43 |
:wq |