Fedora Present and Future: a Fedora.next 2014 Update (Part I, "Why?")

[lee]

Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> writes:

> On 24 March 2014 12:45, lee <lee at yun.yagibdah.de> wrote:
>> /usr belongs on it`s own partition.  And last time I looked, it would
>> not be compliant with the FHS not to have what is needed in /bin and
>> /sbin but to use symlinks instead.
>
>
> I think that's a very 1980s, or early-1990s, way of looking at it.
>
> Since the normal way to boot a PC now is a complete functioning OS on
> a single removable-media volume - be that an optical disk or USB flash
> media

I guess you mean when booting an installer?

> - most of the rationale for splitting up  the bits of the /usr
> tree have long ceased to apply.

Which ones in particular are you referring to?

> The smallest hard disks available today (~500GB) are roughly 2 orders
> of magnitude bigger than is needed for a full Linux desktop install
> (~5GB). It is not possible to buy a new computer without a graphical
> display.

And?

Besides, you can still buy disks with less capacity.

> There is no need for separating out admin binaries, user binaries,
> local binaries, graphical binaries etc. any more, and hasn't been for
> about 2 decades.

I have always found it very useful, and it still is.  Are you even
assuming that people have only single disk or single volume?

> I think it's a brilliant, if brave, idea of Fedora to get rid of a
> historical distinction that is now pointless, but it's planned and
> discussed and decided, as far as I know:

I don`t exactly know what they are doing, but I find it would be a very
stupid idea to give up a useful and reasonable distinction between
software for different uses and to loose the order the FHS brings about.
Sure you can do it as an option if you like and put everything on a
single partition; nobody keeps you from doing that.  Don`t force it upon
anyone who doesn`t want it, though.


-- 
Fedora release 20 (Heisenbug)