On Tuesday 08 June 2021, Larry Len Rainey wrote:
In Tumbleweed, /bin /sbin /lib /lib64 are symbolic links to /usr/bin /usr/sbin /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 I can see that but why is /opt not a link to /usr/opt and all /usr/opt not there too? Am I missing the reason or has no one thought of this yet?
my 2 cents
The UsrMerge seemed to be primarily aimed at cleaning up the mess due to dual OS locations such as /bin and /usr/bin. The /opt hierarchy has never had this issue (it does perhaps have other issues - such as deciding whether something belongs in /opt or in the main OS hierarchy). Because the /opt hierarchy doesn't such merge issues, it's contents can be easily relocated to where ever you wish. If relocated, a mount or bind-mount can be used to provide the necessary File System Standard /opt location, for example, you could move it to /usr/opt and then add the following entry to /etc/fstab: /usr/opt /opt none bind,user_xattr,noatime 0 0 There is a similar situation for /usr/local, I never want local to be part of the OS volume, so I use a bind mount: LABEL=home /home ext4 noatime,user_xattr 1 2 /home/local /usr/local none bind,user_xattr,noatime 0 0 Bind mounts for such situations are often better than sym-links. Some applications behave differently when encountering sym-links, for example, some resolve and store the true path which then causes a problem should further relocating be necessary. Michael