Subject: Re: Package Paths Proposal v2
To: NetBSD Packages Technical Discussion List <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
Date: 12/17/1998 20:58:12
[ On Thu, December 17, 1998 at 16:14:11 (-0800), [This is my bacque pas, this is my faux pas] wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Package Paths Proposal v2
> Actually, Greg, if you want to be technical, / (root) is the "broken" one.
> It is possessive of /var, /dev, /etc.
I agree 101% (as you will know from our "off-line" conversation!).
For the rest of this list: I've been describing why I would not mind at
all if /usr were abolished and everything merged back to /. For example
then /local and /pkg, and so on could be true (though perhaps not
recursive) mirrors of /. There are *many* advantages to this scheme,
and very few disadvantages (even for development machines where the
system filesystem wouldn't be "stable", an alternate system filesystem
can easily be created and maintained).
(Strictly speaking there would of course be a few things that would not
normally belong in /local, /pkg, etc., such as /dev, though the full
mirroring could still be maintaind with "/pkg/dev -> ../dev.)
> Should we update the hier(7) man page to note nodes which are
> typically only present in the system itself, or illustrate
> that other hierarchies follow what lies below /usr?
That would be better than the status quo, but it would certianly won't
solve the problems that come from trying to encompass more than one of
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <firstname.lastname@example.org> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>