Subject: Re: HEADS UP: migration to fully dynamic linked "base" system
To: Luke Mewburn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Andrew Cagney <email@example.com>
Date: 08/27/2002 12:25:39
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 12:45:38PM +0900, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> | > | even if /usr/lib/libc.so is a symlink, i think the above is an
> | > | important point. think of shlib major bump (in libtermcap or whatever)
> | > | and old binaries in /usr/pkg/bin.
> | >this isn't a problem. i've run a converted system for a while, and
> | >old applications (with just /usr/lib in the rpath) work ok.
> | i see. how many libraries do you have in /lib?
> | from Makefile, i guess the followings are in /lib. it is more than
> | i guessed (i didn't expect to see libcrypto in the list...)
> | libc
> | libdes (= libcrypto)
> | libedit
> | libipsec
> | libkrb
> | libkvm
> | libl
> | libm
> | librmt
> | libtermcap
> | libutil
> | liby
> | libz
> My i386 has the following shared libraries in /lib:
> libc libcrypt libedit libipsec libkvm libm
> libm387 libtermcap libtermlib libutil libz
Why not just be done with it and point /lib -> /usr/lib and /bin ->
/usr/bin? The only things that really need to be in / are the commands
that are needed to get /usr mounted and there, what comes on the install
CD is a pretty good guide.
As for /recover:
- it isn't used by default so how does anyone even know it works? At
least a normal boot gets to work out the normal binaries and boot paths.
- remembering to type /recover/init or /recover/sh is going to, er,
confuse people and feel very strange to (umm) unix bigots.
- does ``init'' really need to be internationalized?