IOn 30.01.2020 08:27, tlaronde%polynum.com@localhost wrote: > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:47:51PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >> On 29.01.2020 22:32, Alexander Nasonov wrote: >>> Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: >>>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 11:33:22AM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 09:21:23PM +0000, Roy Marples wrote: >>>>>> To fix this, I suggest that we split syslogd into syslogd and syslogd-network. >>>>> >>>>> We could also do a much simpler and more radical decision and stop >>>>> splitting / and /usr. Of all the partitioning choices available, it >>>>> truely seems to be a pointless legacy from extremely constrained >>>>> hardware with a significant cost to maintain. >>>> >>>> This is elegant and I would like to see it. Just remove /usr entirely and >>>> collapse its contents into / - no /usr/bin, no /usr/lib, etc. >>> >>> I like it when fsck doesn't take ages to check /. With bigger /, >>> it's going to be problematic. >>> >> >> There is an obvious radical complementary proposal to discuss whether to >> diverge from the BSD spirit and remove everything unless really needed >> from the basesystem (toolchain) and rely on pkgsrc for everything else >> (ssh, ldap, xorg, tmux, bind, openssl etc). >> > > Pkgsrc in general does not support cross-compilation. > > This is one big argument to have X11 native. The same, IMHO, goes for > fundamental basics like nowadays ssh etc. > > NetBSD is multi-arch and easy cross-compilation is becoming more and more useful with > the ubiquity of ARM and the rise of RISCV. > This is also a natural argument against merge. I have no personal interest myself in merge of / and /usr neither rearranging sets, at least today.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature