More: [1.7] packaging problem? Both /usr/bin/ and /usr/lib/ are non-empty

Corinna Vinschen
Mon May 11 13:55:00 GMT 2009

On May 11 09:41, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 09:32:01AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On May 10 12:31, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 12:46:46PM +0000, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> >> > All else seems silent on the proposal.  You might want to give it a go.
> >> 
> >> If it isn't too much trouble, could the proposal be summarized?
> >> 
> >> If it is just that the / entry in fstab be ignored in favor of being
> >> equivalent to one level above where the cygwin DLL was found, I think
> >> that's a good idea.  That is actually sort of similar to the way the
> >> linux boot process works.  The root is controlled by the kernel and the
> >> entry in /etc/fstab doesn't really necessarily mean much.
> >
> >The idea is to convert the /usr/bin and /usr/lib mount points also to
> >non-changable mount points since they are supposed to point always to
> >/bin and /lib.
> >
> >Right now we have this somewhat fragile construct that base-cygwin must
> >create the /etc/fstab file first, otherwise the mount points are not in
> >place when later postinstall scripts access files in /usr/bin or
> >/usr/lib.
> >
> >It seems a more robust solution to create all three mount points in Cygwin
> >itself and make them readonly.
> >
> >Good? Bad? Ugly?
> Thanks.  I wasn't able to read email much last week so it is nice to
> have a summary.
> I think I now regret the fact that we (I?) made /bin and /usr/bin the
> same thing but I guess those cows are out of the barn.
> Wasn't the proposal to allow overriding of /usr/bin and /usr/lib if
> someone adds them to their fstab?  I'd feel more comfortable with
> allowing the users control over that, I think.  I can see why root would
> be a special case but I don't think that /usr/bin and /usr/lib need to
> be quite as special.

Actually, the whole idea is to generate default /usr/bin and /usr/lib
entries.  Whether or not they are readonly is probably not as important.
We lived with overridable entries all the time, so I have no strong
opinion.  Just generating default entries seems to be a good thing.

> Wasn't there also an alternate proposal about making '/usr' == '/' unless
> it is overridden in /etc/fstab?

I don't think I like the idea.  Typically we have no /usr entry in
fstab, but we have a valid /usr directory.


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list