Subject: Re: HEADS UP: migration to fully dynamic linked "base" system
To: Johnny Billquist <email@example.com>
From: Greywolf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/26/2002 13:30:33
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Johnny Billquist wrote:
# But if so, then I have another suggestion.
# Duplicate /bin and /sbin in /usr/bin and /usr/sbin, and have them
# dynamically linked there. That would also mean that users paths could skip
# /bin, which in itself is a boon, since the path variable cannot be
# arbitrarily long.
Only if you don't mean that:
- You plan to copy /usr/bin back to /bin, NOR
- You plan on doing SunOS' bonehead move that forced / and /usr to be
mounted at the same time in order to get anything done.
I'd strenuously object to that. I have my reasons for keeping / and /usr
separate, and Sun's move in SunOS 4.x was the height of stupidity at the
time, including making mknod a dynamically-linked executable (they
mapped from /dev/zero; if /dev/zero didn't exist, you had to mknod it,
but mknod was dynamically linked...). Please don't ask how /dev/zero
disappeared. I have no idea.
NetBSD: The Last Bastion of the true UNIX Religion.