On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 02:19:39PM -0500, Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-01-03 at 13:02 -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 01:50:25PM -0500, Olivier Crête wrote:
> > > I don't see what breakage would be caused by a big-bang update (move
> > > everything in /sbin,/bin/,usr/sbin to usr/bin and add symlinks. I really
> > > doubt any system has a /usr so tight that adding the couple things that
> > > are in / to /usr/bin would break it.. Btw, this also includes /lib*
> > > to /usr/lib*.
> >
> > I think the best way to do this part of it is going to be to just follow
> > the upstream packages. When they release a new version that installs in
> > /usr, just allow that to happen. Eventually there will be very little in
> > /{bin,sbin,lib}, maybe nothing besides a couple of symbolic links like
> > /bin/sh.
> >
> > I am not for what fedora is doing with the
> > /bin->/usr/bin, /sbin->/usr/sbin and /lib->/usr/lib symlinks.
>
> At least the upstreams that work for RedHat and Suse (and that's almost
> all system packages) will come to expect that these symlinks exist. For
> example, I just heard that kmod will expect kernel modules
> in /usr/lib/modules even though the kernel installs them
> in /lib/modules.. So yes, upstream will force these symlinks on us too.I just looked at the commit in kmod for this. It can be worked around with a ./configure switch until the kernel switches their install location, so they aren't forcing this one. William
pgpTwJq1xDj6J.pgp
Description: PGP signature
