On 10/19/2010 02:25 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Peter Jones <pjones(a)redhat.com> said:
> On 10/19/2010 11:28 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
>> And how many of those bugs are exclusively a /usr-is-separate problem
>> vs. how many of them are didn't-anticipate-alternate-partitioning
>> problems?
>
> If I understand your distinction correctly, then the overwhelming majority
> of them are the former.
The one that led to this discussion (626007) doesn't seem to be.
Indeed.
The "/usr/sbin/foo is needed before FSes are mounted" is a
fairly
trivial problem to solve in the majority of cases; I don't see that as a
big deal.
If separate /usr isn't considered a valid configuration, why do we have
separate /bin, /sbin, /lib{,64}?
Because we haven't decided to merge those together. That's really the only
reason - there's no over-arching technical reason they need to be separate.
It's entirely a historical consideration.
--
Peter
What we need is either less corruption, or more chances to participate in it.
01234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789