Debian Sticking With Merged /usr Plan

[Weasel]

The file system layout stays the same. It's only about a decade from now when enough programs will be updated that we will get rid of /{bin,sbin,lib}

Because #!/usr/bin/bash is so much "better" than #!/bin/bash, what a "progress" to have to type more. I personally don't give a shit since it's trivial to add your own symlinks if someone is retarded enough to remove them.

[waxhead]

It appears that GoboLinux did something interesting : https://www.gobolinux.org/at_a_glance.html and GoboHide would be good for those that don't like a cluttered rootfs.

[cybertraveler]

It appears that GoboLinux did something interesting : https://www.gobolinux.org/at_a_glance.html and GoboHide would be good for those that don't like a cluttered rootfs.

Sadly that project hasn't gathered much attention. It's a really awesome design.

[Danielsan]

Gobo Linux is a nice distro but you need at least 2tera of space...

[starshipeleven]

Because #!/usr/bin/bash is so much "better" than #!/bin/bash, what a "progress" to have to type more. I personally don't give a shit since it's trivial to add your own symlinks if someone is retarded enough to remove them.

FYI, add ".sh" to the name of your shell script (i.e. myscript.sh ) and you can do without a shebang entirely. The future is now old man (not really a new thing).

[Britoid]

The file system layout stays the same. It's only about a decade from now when enough programs will be updated that we will get rid of /{bin,sbin,lib}
But this is a necessary first step.

One of the reasons for Flatpak is that it keeps desktop applications in separate folders than the system binaries. But it has to use namespaces to achieve it.

Which should of been a thing from the start.

[ssokolow]

Because #!/usr/bin/bash is so much "better" than #!/bin/bash, what a "progress" to have to type more. I personally don't give a shit since it's trivial to add your own symlinks if someone is retarded enough to remove them.

Doubtful it'll happen anyway. I think /bin/sh is required by POSIX.

[starshipeleven]

Doubtful it'll happen anyway. I think /bin/sh is required by POSIX.

It seems the location of the shell isn't part of POSIX, they only need a POSIX shell to exist somewhere accessible. https://unix.stackexchange.com/quest...-bin-directory

[LaeMing]

Because #!/usr/bin/bash is so much "better" than #!/bin/bash, what a "progress" to have to type more. I personally don't give a shit since it's trivial to add your own symlinks if someone is retarded enough to remove them.

I must admit my own inclination would be to merge the other way, into the root folders, and ditch /usr, however getting everything into one folder anywhere is the actual hump. After that, where the folder is located should be a good deal more malleable.

[swagg_boi]

FYI, add ".sh" to the name of your shell script (i.e. myscript.sh ) and you can do without a shebang entirely. The future is now old man (not really a new thing).

I tried this with and without the ".sh" extension and it worked both ways... I assumed the file extension would be strictly cosmetic but apparently the shebang is too. I've been using "/usr/bin/env perl" for Perl scripts so I might just start doing "/usr/bin/env sh" on my shell scripts just to be extra special