Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:51:11 +0200 | From | Adrian Bunk <> | Subject | Re: The naming wars continue... |
| |
On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 03:17:16PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote: > Denis Vlasenko wrote: > > > >Why there is any distinction between, say, gcc and X? > >KDE and Midnight Commander? etc... Why some of them go > >to /opt while others are spread across dozen of dirs? > >This seems to be inconsistent to me. > > At one time Sun had the convention that things in /usr could be mounted > ro on multiple machines. That worked, it predates Linux so Linux was the > o/s which chose to go another way, and it covered the base things in a > system. > > That actually seems like a good way to split a networked environment, > with /bin and /sbin having just enough to get the system up and mount > /usr. I can't speak to why that is being done differently now. > > I guess someone was nervous about mounting a local /usr/local on a > (possibly) network mounted /usr and theu /opt, but that's a guess on my > part as well.
Read-only /usr is required according to the FHS, and at least on Debian a read-only /usr works without problems.
A bigger problem might be to properly support it in the package manager.
cu Adrian
[1]
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |