3 ms·
I was curious why they are making the change now so I skipped right to the "benefit to fedora" section. They do not mention mounting /usr RO anywhere. Was this
by dfc 2y ago
I was curious why they are making the change now so I skipped right to the "benefit to fedora" section. They do not mention mounting /usr RO anywhere. Was this brought up in previous discussions? I do not understand why merging bin and sbin allows for mounting /usr RO.
The two issues seem totally unrelated to me. /usr/bin and /usr/sbin are directories under /usr. Why does making sbin a symlink allow for mounting /usr RO?
- PlutoIsAPlanet 2y agoBecause in this day and age on Fedora, there's practically zero difference between sbin and bin. You could separate it I guess correctly between system-only bins again, but you'd break existing software that's hardcoded sbin and bin.
- dfc 2y agoI think I am missing something obvious. I apologize for being dense. What does the fact that "there's zero difference between sbin and bin" have to do with mounting /usr read only?
- NekkoDroid 2y agoThis change has nothing to do with it. The entire thread here is more talking about the usr-merge specifically (I think).
- dfc 2y agoThank you. I think you are correct.
- eyelidlessness 2y agoI think GP was saying that it’s /usr/bin rather than /bin for mounting as readonly. Not that merging any particular sbin with bin serves the purpose of readonly mounting. Disclaimer: I’m mostly just a Mac user/interested spectator. It’s possible I’m misunderstanding GP, and it’s not clear to me why the /usr distinction matters for readonly mounting either. But I couldn’t help jumping in to see if I could help clarify something, because there are just an astonishing number of ambiguities and confusions about those ambiguities throughout the comments on this post!