Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263392AbUJ2PiM (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:38:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263394AbUJ2PhK (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:37:10 -0400 Received: from witte.sonytel.be ([80.88.33.193]:17798 "EHLO witte.sonytel.be") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263414AbUJ2PC7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:02:59 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:54:42 +0200 (MEST) From: Geert Uytterhoeven To: Adrian Bunk cc: Bill Davidsen , Denis Vlasenko , "H. Peter Anvin" , Tonnerre , Linux Kernel Development , Erik Andersen , uclibc@uclibc.org Subject: Re: The naming wars continue... In-Reply-To: <20041029145111.GO6677@stusta.de> Message-ID: References: <200410271133.25701.vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua> <417FF43C.5050208@tmr.com> <20041029145111.GO6677@stusta.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2052 Lines: 52 On Fri, 29 Oct 2004, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 03:17:16PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote: > > Denis Vlasenko wrote: > > >Why there is any distinction between, say, gcc and X? > > >KDE and Midnight Commander? etc... Why some of them go > > >to /opt while others are spread across dozen of dirs? > > >This seems to be inconsistent to me. > > > > At one time Sun had the convention that things in /usr could be mounted > > ro on multiple machines. That worked, it predates Linux so Linux was the > > o/s which chose to go another way, and it covered the base things in a > > system. > > > > That actually seems like a good way to split a networked environment, > > with /bin and /sbin having just enough to get the system up and mount > > /usr. I can't speak to why that is being done differently now. > > > > I guess someone was nervous about mounting a local /usr/local on a > > (possibly) network mounted /usr and theu /opt, but that's a guess on my > > part as well. > > Read-only /usr is required according to the FHS, and at least on Debian > a read-only /usr works without problems. Indeed. And that's what I use. In /etc/apt/apt.conf I have: DPkg { // Auto re-mounting of a readonly /usr Pre-Invoke {"mount -o remount,rw /usr";}; Post-Invoke {"mount -o remount,ro /usr";}; } > A bigger problem might be to properly support it in the package manager. Yep. Apt knows about it, but dpkg doesn't. And remounting /usr read-only fails if files are in use. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/