FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-11-2011, 02:44 PM
Sven Joachim
 
Default Move all to /usr

On 2011-10-11 16:32 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
>
> I am still not 100% persuaded that this would be easy to do, but at
> least I think that it has more merit than the old "move all to /"...
>
> How much complex would it be to implement this in Debian?

Rather complex, I'm afraid. Especially as not all architectures even
support an initramfs, AFAIK.

> Would "mv /bin/* /usr/bin/" and making it a symlink just work, without
> the need to create temporary symlinks in every package as red hat plans
> to do?

Not at all, for there are some packages which ship both /bin/foo and a
symlink /usr/bin/foo to it; those would be broken.

Sven


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87hb3fa8qr.fsf@turtle.gmx.de">http://lists.debian.org/87hb3fa8qr.fsf@turtle.gmx.de
 
Old 10-11-2011, 02:57 PM
Rodolfo kix Garcia
 
Default Move all to /usr

On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:44:12 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:

On 2011-10-11 16:32 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:


https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove

[snip]


Would "mv /bin/* /usr/bin/" and making it a symlink just work,
without
the need to create temporary symlinks in every package as red hat
plans

to do?


Not at all, for there are some packages which ship both /bin/foo and
a

symlink /usr/bin/foo to it; those would be broken.

Sven


Is a nice concept. In other OS, like Plan9, there are only one folder
with the binary files (/bin), the other folders (/usr/bin, /sbin, ...
and ~/bin) are "binded" to /bin.


In Windows 7 this concept is used in "My Documents", "My Music",...
where multiple folders are showed together in other folder. When you
write to the folder, one is the default folder for writing.


In Linux > 2.4, "mount -t bind" is near of this idea.

Best Regards,

kix
--
||// //// Rodolfo "kix" Garcia
||// // http://www.kix.es/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 2f36f0a7d7da36ea55cf57eac8276d18@kix.es">http://lists.debian.org/2f36f0a7d7da36ea55cf57eac8276d18@kix.es
 
Old 10-11-2011, 03:53 PM
 
Default Move all to /usr

On Oct 11, Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de> wrote:

> Rather complex, I'm afraid. Especially as not all architectures even
> support an initramfs, AFAIK.
I doubt this, since the initramfs can be embedded in the kernel image
itself (and indeed it always contains one, it just is empty).
But still, then these architectures would not support keeping /usr on a
standalone file system, which may be an acceptable compromise.

> > Would "mv /bin/* /usr/bin/" and making it a symlink just work, without
> > the need to create temporary symlinks in every package as red hat plans
> > to do?
> Not at all, for there are some packages which ship both /bin/foo and a
> symlink /usr/bin/foo to it; those would be broken.
Yes, let's assume a slightly smarter algorithm to merge the directories
and keep the real binary.
What else could go wrong?

cd /bin/
for x in *; do [ -e /usr/bin/$x ] && ls -l $x /usr/bin/$x; done
cd /sbin/
for x in *; do [ -e /usr/sbin/$x ] && ls -l $x /usr/sbin/$x; done
cd /lib/
for x in *; do [ -e /usr/lib/$x ] && ls -ld $x /usr/lib/$x; done

--
ciao,
Marco
 
Old 10-11-2011, 03:57 PM
unruh
 
Default Move all to /usr

On 2011-10-11, Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
>
> I am still not 100% persuaded that this would be easy to do, but at
> least I think that it has more merit than the old "move all to /"...
>
> How much complex would it be to implement this in Debian?
> Would "mv /bin/* /usr/bin/" and making it a symlink just work, without
> the need to create temporary symlinks in every package as red hat plans
> to do?

That would be fine if /usr is always on the root partition. However many
people put /usr on a separate partition, and then this could be a
disaster. /bin contains lots of stuff that needs to be there at boot (
just like /lib or /etc) and having a link to a non-existant partition
would break lots.

> This reminds me a bit of the /usr/doc/ => /usr/share/doc/ transition.

Hardly. It does not matter where doc is as far as booting or running is
concerned. It is purely a housekeeping issue. It does matter where say
the program mount is, since if it is not available at boot, it is going
to be pretty hard to use your system.


>
> --
> ciao,
> Marco
>
>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: slrnj98pr9.9sb.unruh@wormhole.physics.ubc.ca">http ://lists.debian.org/slrnj98pr9.9sb.unruh@wormhole.physics.ubc.ca
 
Old 10-11-2011, 04:09 PM
Ivan Shmakov
 
Default Move all to /usr

>>>>> Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> writes:
>>>>> On Oct 11, Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de> wrote:

>> Rather complex, I'm afraid. Especially as not all architectures
>> even support an initramfs, AFAIK.

> I doubt this, since the initramfs can be embedded in the kernel image
> itself (and indeed it always contains one, it just is empty). But
> still, then these architectures would not support keeping /usr on a
> standalone file system, which may be an acceptable compromise.

I don't seem to understand. / is used to be self-contained; one
was still able run a “bare bones” system with just / (say, if
/usr was badly damaged somehow.) How an architecture could
/not/ support having /usr on a separate filesystem.

On the shore, I see no value in the whole idea of merging / and
/usr. Somehow, it reminds me a recent trend of moving graphical
mode support (for the architectures generally capable of a text
mode, as in: amd64, i386) from userspace (as in: X server) to
kernelspace (as in: fbcon, Wayland.)

Saving a dozen of bytes in ${PATH} doesn't seem like an
astonishing idea, anyway. What's the point, then?

[…]

--
FSF associate member #7257


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 868vor33yu.fsf@gray.siamics.net">http://lists.debian.org/868vor33yu.fsf@gray.siamics.net
 
Old 10-11-2011, 04:16 PM
 
Default Move all to /usr

On Oct 11, Ivan Shmakov <ivan@gray.siamics.net> wrote:

> Saving a dozen of bytes in ${PATH} doesn't seem like an
> astonishing idea, anyway. What's the point, then?
It is explained in the Red Hat wiki page. Try reading it again.

--
ciao,
Marco
 
Old 10-11-2011, 04:21 PM
Matt Zagrabelny
 
Default Move all to /usr

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Ivan Shmakov <ivan@gray.siamics.net> wrote:

> * * * *Saving a dozen of bytes in ${PATH} doesn't seem like an
> * * * *astonishing idea, anyway. *What's the point, then?

There are good arguments in the following link (Marco provided it with
his initial email.)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove

-mz


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CAOLfK3VOVgfKeRb=0Vs3RZbBTicNB5LSZKypRPZOg9eOcDcDW w@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/CAOLfK3VOVgfKeRb=0Vs3RZbBTicNB5LSZKypRPZOg9eOcDcDW w@mail.gmail.com
 
Old 10-11-2011, 04:37 PM
 
Default Move all to /usr

On Oct 11, unruh <unruh@wormhole.physics.ubc.ca> wrote:

> That would be fine if /usr is always on the root partition. However many
Feel free to come back after actually reading the linked page.

--
ciao,
Marco
 
Old 10-11-2011, 04:41 PM
Ivan Shmakov
 
Default Move all to /usr

>>>>> Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> writes:
>>>>> On Oct 11, Ivan Shmakov <ivan@gray.siamics.net> wrote:

>> Saving a dozen of bytes in ${PATH} doesn't seem like an
>> astonishing idea, anyway. What's the point, then?

> It is explained in the Red Hat wiki page. Try reading it again.

Indeed, I've just read it. To summarize: our / and /usr/ became
quite tangled over the years, so let's use initramfs instead of
/, and / instead of /usr.

Honestly, I believe that Debian hasn't messed up that that
badly. (In particular, I still think that it's possible to boot
without /usr being available.) However, should initramfs really
be considered “Debian's brand new /”, I demand that both
e2fsck(8) and bash(1) be included into one by default, so that
one would still be able to boot and repair a damaged /usr/^W /
from there.

To me, going this way means that initramfs becomes subject to
unconstrained growth. Somehow, I deem it less acceptable for
initramfs than for /.

--
FSF associate member #7257


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 864nzf32hn.fsf@gray.siamics.net">http://lists.debian.org/864nzf32hn.fsf@gray.siamics.net
 
Old 10-11-2011, 05:13 PM
Josselin Mouette
 
Default Move all to /usr

Le mardi 11 octobre 2011 16:32 +0200, Marco d'Itri a crit :
> I am still not 100% persuaded that this would be easy to do, but at
> least I think that it has more merit than the old "move all to /"...

We already discussed the idea of dropping support for a separate /usr,
and the outcome was a broad consensus for keeping things this way.

--
.'`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'
`-


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 1318353232.16354.0.camel@tomoyo">http://lists.debian.org/1318353232.16354.0.camel@tomoyo
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org