Paul Gevers wrote: >>> Historically there was a reason to split root level >>> <filename>bin</filename>, <filename>sbin</filename> and >>> <filename>lib</filename> directories into >> >> Nobody ever split /bin etc. "into" /usr; the historical standard was >> to have those directories to split things "out from" the equivalents >> under /usr. > > When I read that the first three times, I read it the opposite of what I > meant, can we improve even further?
How about: The historical justifications for the filesystem layout with <filename>/bin</filename>, <filename>/sbin</filename>, and <filename>/lib</filename> directories separate from their equivalents under <filename>/usr</filename> no longer apply today; see [...] >> Preferably this bald assertion would go with a link to an explanation; >> and I suppose that has to be >> https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/TheCaseForTheUsrMerge >> (unless the Debian Wiki version suddenly gets much better). > > I really liked this (linked from that page): > http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html but > I guess it doesn't make a strong link. Yes, I wish the official versions were even half as persuasive as that one. I could try to fix up the Debian Wiki page, but I'd rather not. >>> Debian >>> bullseye will be the last Debian release that supports the >>> non-merged-usr layout. >> >> Unless the plan is for the bookworm Release Notes to tell users with >> legacy layouts that they can't upgrade, we should be pointing at >> usrmerge here. > > We have bug #841666 for that? It wasn't concluded there yet. And I'd > expect we'll force the upgrade then, not something users would need to > actively do. Do we have a proposed mechanism for that? Is usrmerge going to be made Essential (but a no-op on already-merged systems), or what? The problem with this announcement that the End of the Legacy Filesystem Layout Is Nigh is that users get no clue what they're meant to *do* about it. My own desktop has been upgraded in place since Wheezy; unless I'm finally going to be switching onto new hardware, I'd prefer to plan in terms of doing two separate steps, a usrmerge in 2022 and a dist-upgrade in 2023. A vaguer version: summary</ulink>. Debian bullseye will be the last Debian release that supports the non-merged-usr layout, so systems with an unmerged layout that have been upgraded without a reinstall should consider installing the package <systemitem role="package">usrmerge</systemitem>. > This patch is the first place where we <quote> a release name. Do we > want quotes everywhere? I personally don't like to quote bullseye or > buster, but emphasizing sounds OK. And indeed, I wasn't consistent with > "Debian bullseye" here, maybe that should have been plain "bullseye" > (without quotes ;)) We could use &debian; &releasename;, of course - I moan about how pointless it is when we know it'll only be true for one release, but at least it takes care of standardised formatting. -- JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package