On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 10:54:49AM -0700, L A Walsh wrote:
> Was wondering about the addition of an "enable-bindir-path" which would only
> use
> paths with /bin instead of /usr/bin for setups where /usr/bin -> /bin (like
> cygwin who mounts /bin and /lib on /usr/bin and /usr/lib -- using mounts
> instead of symlinks). The've had that since the beginning with nothing
> being
> installed in /usr/bin or /usr/lib.
So for this use-case /usr should be ignored at all, right? What about PATH
setting? Is it also without /usr? What about man pages, docs?
I have nothing against this feature, but question is if it's important
enough to implement and support it ;-)
> Was also wondering why that wasn't chosen as a default for merging, since
> /bin and /lib are almost always on the root file system so they are always
> there, versus /usr/{bin,lib{,64}} which may need to be mounted before it can
> be used...if it can't be mounted, having things in /bin & /lib pointed
> to /usr won't work so well.
I think originally /usr was also on the same FS as /{bin,lib,...}.
Anyway, now this no issue as we use initram images where is all
stuff that is necessary to assemble usable hierarchy of filesystems
(including RAIDs, NFS moutpoints, etc.)
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
