[Feature Suggestion] UsrMove continued
sergemdev at gmail.com
Wed Oct 10 10:11:12 UTC 2012
2012/10/9 tim.lauridsen wrote:
>> So you make your system incompatible with every other Linux distro out
>> there, and with all existing documentation, but to what end? Tidyness?
Tidyness, simplicity, new features... Incompatible with older, but
compatible with newer distros. That's close to what Solaris does on
its livecd and really close to what Android does on mobile phones.
Turning /lib into /usr/lib was also incompatible with every other Linux
distro, nevertheless it's already done.
> +1 to Richard, I really don't see the purpose, why does it matter that
> number of dirs in /.
I don't know why, but some people actually like when there're fewer
subdirectories in a directory.
> Lot of apps will break if you move /proc or /dev
Sure. And many apps would break if you move /bin to /usr/bin. But still,
you did that? ;)
> and if you replace them
> with symlink in the next 10 years you still have the same number of dirs
> under /, you have even more because you have added some new ones.
That's a compatibility tradeoff. But an "eyecandy" kernel module can hide
those symlinks, so user would see a nice simple layout right now, and not
in 10 years.
> I can understand you want to merge dirs there have the same function /bin ->
> /usr/bin, but this has no benefits at all.
Quite the contrary. If you compare it with the original UsrMove page you
will see that it had same reasons, same "Benefits" and "User Experience",
but no final goal. Original UsrMove was looking like "separate /usr is
partially broken, let's break it completely". It officially declared
that we don't know what files should be put to /bin or /usr/bin, but
it brought no new features.
While this one (besides creating even more "Simpler and cleaner file
system layout") has a goal: making explicit root filesystem optional
(i.e. so small and simple that it could be replaced with initramfs).
Which gives lots of new features, like simple diskless NFS stations,
multiple distros on same partition, easier lightweight containers...
I could understand if arguments against it were suggested before UsrMove
implementation. But it's already there. There're already symlinks to
/bin, /lib, /sbin. Root user already cannot login without /usr being
mounted. And similar selinux issues were already taken care of. Most
of the work is already done. It's not a new suggestion, it's the same
UsrMove, but now it can bring some new features.
More information about the devel