The strangeness called `sbin'

[Mehmet Erol Sanliturk]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:29 AM, Ed Schouten <ed at 80386.nl> wrote:

> Hi Doug,
>
> * Doug Barton <dougb at FreeBSD.org>, 20111113 23:57:
> > If we're going to talk about making a change that's actually worth
> > making, let's just move everything into / and get rid of /usr
> > altogether. It served its purpose back when it came into being, but with
> > modern disk sizes and the (unfortunate) prevalence of the "one big /"
> > layout model, it's time in the sun is long past.
>
> Now that I think of it, it may be possible to sort of combine this with
> my approach in a way that it doesn't break POLA for existing users. What
> if we leave everything in the tree alone, but only modify the code, so
> that any new installations on empty directory structures use the
> following symlinks:
>
> - /sbin -> /bin
> - /usr/bin -> /bin
> - /usr/games -> /bin
> - /usr/lib -> /lib
> - /usr/sbin -> /bin
>


.............................................




>
> But now the question remains how we should change the default
> partitioning. I think default installations place home directories in
> /usr/home, with a symlink from /home. Should they now be placed in
> /usr/local/home?
>


.............................................


>
> --
>  Ed Schouten <ed at 80386.nl>
>  WWW: http://80386.nl/
>




Is it not possible to use a symbolic link from /usr/home to /home and put
/home into a separate partition or drive ?

Mandriva Linux ( and other Linux distributions , mostly ) is using this
separate partition and it is possible to completely install ( not upgrade )
a new version without losing /home by only specifying to mount the existing
/home during new installation . Even it is asking whether /var will be
re-installed or not .

In FreeBSD , such a new ( default ) version installation from released
*.iso CD/DVD is not possible without losing existing /usr/home .


Thank you very much .

Mehmet Erol Sanliturk