The case for the /usr merge [LWN.net]

The case for the /usr merge

Posted Jan 27, 2012 11:48 UTC (Fri) by sorpigal (subscriber, #36106)
In reply to: The case for the /usr merge by josh
Parent article: The case for the /usr merge

> So, making /bin and /sbin self-contained without requiring /usr would require expanding the "minimal" root filesystem to include zlib, libcrypto, PKCS#11, PC/SC smart-card support, gnutls, libtasn, libnfnetlink, several glib libraries, gio, dbus, and OpenSSL.

You say this like it's ridiculous, but I don't see a big problem. On one of my systems, also Debian, I have 10 binaries in /bin or /sbin which need /usr, on another I have 11. They depend, between them, on 22 unique libraries. This seems like a small problem to require such a big solution.

"10 of 332 binaries in /bin and /sbin require /usr. Obviously the correct solution is to get rid of /usr and merge it into /, and not to move 22 libraries into /lib/" - does that sound right?

(Log in to post comments)

The case for the /usr merge

Posted Jan 27, 2012 14:21 UTC (Fri) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link]

And one day you find that /usr/lib contains nothing but high-level GUI libraries, because creeping dependencies have slurped everything simpler into /lib. Given that a lot of "separate /usr" advocates also seem to be "slimline /" advocates...