[Feature Suggestion] UsrMove continued

Serge sergemdev at gmail.com
Fri Oct 12 00:57:25 UTC 2012

2012/10/10 David Howells wrote:

> The contents of /dev vary depending on what hardware the computer has
> available - which may change in real time - so it cannot be shared, so
> why move it?

Ah, no, /dev was moved not because of sharing. It's just original UsrMove
among other benefits has the line:
> Simpler and cleaner overall file system layout, with full compatibility.
I was just trying to actually do that.
The best implementation I could come up with is:
>   /os    -- OS, kernel-space
>   /usr   -- user-space, shareable, possibly read-only,
>   /var   -- variable system data, read-write, non-shareable
>   /home  -- variable user data, read-write, shareable
> And nothing else.
Looks very simple, clean, easy to understand. That was the point
for UsrMove. Or at least the UsrMove page says so...

> You would _have_ to have symlinks at /dev and /proc - so moving these
> gains you nothing.

Except "simple and clean file system layout". Does it have any drawbacks?
I could not notice any changes in speed, I see no difference in
functionality. It works same, but looks better. :)

And some years later we may drop those symlinks, as well as /lib, /bin...

>> ... But an "eyecandy" kernel module can hide those symlinks, so user
>> would see a nice simple layout right now, and not in 10 years.
> Ugh.  Don't go there.  Really don't.  That's for userspace to deal with -
> just like hiding files whose name begins with a ".".

Well, that was just an idea: show everything for `root` (UID=0),
but hide for the rest, so users could see the beauty. :)

> Which does not prevent you from leaving /dev and /proc where they are.

Well, maybe you're right. I have just listed all the ideas together,
trying to look as forward as possible. We can filter the best of them
and postpone/throw out the others. That's what the initial email was
written for.

> Actually, the UsrMove has mucked up at least one way of doing things

I agree that UsrMove is not in a good shape now. So it should be either
backed out, or moved forward and fixed. That's what I'm trying to do.

> we have/had RHEL customer(s) who kept /usr on AFS and were able to boot
> just using the stuff in /bin and /sbin.  This is no longer a viable option with
> Fedora, and presumably RHEL-7.

In my case the goal is to mount /usr using stuff in initramfs.


More information about the devel mailing list