On 03/24/2014 03:12 PM, Liam Proven wrote:
On 24 March 2014 12:45, lee lee@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.
C'mon, feeling something is oldfashioned is hardly an answer.
Having been able to have /usr on a separate partition was a valuable feature, which now has gone lost. IMNSHO, ruined by naive, inexperienced kids (to use the same tone as you did), who were overwhelmed by the additional complexity supporting this feature had required.
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 - most of the rationale for splitting up the bits of the /usr tree have long ceased to apply. The smallest hard disks available today (~500GB) are roughly 2 orders of magnitude bigger than is needed for a full Linux desktop install (~5GB).
Wrong. You are forgetting about systems booting from SD-Cards, USB-sticks and other forms of non-volatile memory.
It is not possible to buy a new computer without a graphical display.
Wrong. Most servers typically are headless, and if they have a graphic card-build-in, it's usually inaccessible or unused.
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.
Right, there is no strong necessity, nevertheless having these still would make sense.
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 disagree. IMNSHO, UsrMove was a prominent epic fail in the long serious faulty decisions Fedora's leadership has committed.
Ralf