Quoting Irrwahn (irrwahn@???):

[...]

> On System V Release 4 and later /bin has already been a symlink to
> /usr/bin, and Solaris implemented the /usr merge about a decade ago.
> Effectively, only some Unices and some Linux based distributions are
> the odd ones out in that respect.

I note without objection (but rather with active appreciation, on
entertainment grounds) that every single one of your talking point so
far -- including the one above -- appear to have been copied
near-verbatim from the pair of Freedesktop.org UsrMerge advocacy Web
pages I dissected in this forum yesterday. Nicely played, sir!

The above appears to have been copied from:
https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/TheCaseForTheUsrMerge/

Myth #6: A split /usr is Unix “standard”, and a merged /usr would be
Linux-specific

Fact: On SysV Unix /bin traditionally has been a symlink to /usr/bin. A
non-symlinked version of that directory is specific to non-SysV Unix and
Linux.

and

Myth #1: Fedora is the first OS to implement the /usr merge

Fact: Oracle Solaris has implemented the /usr merge in parts 15 years
ago, and completed it in Solaris 11. Fedora is following suit here, it
is not the pioneer.


...which is a profoundly silly argument, but one I touched on by saying

Objection: Separate /usr hasn't been consistently standard, e.g.,
/bin was a symlink to /usr/bin on many Unixes.

Answer: I don't give a rat's ass. It's standard on mine.


Anyway, please do carry on with the retyping of other people's talking
points (unless perhaps you are the uncredited author of one or both of
those Freedesktop.org pages, which is also possible). It makes for
amusing reading.