> I'm surprised that they are pushing to remove /bin and keep /usr/bin. Why not the other way round?
That is explained in the “Case for the usr merge” essay: having all the readonly system stuff under a single root directory makes the system much easier to manage, and simplifies useful scenarios like having the system on a network share, or sharing the host’s read-only across guests: with a merged usr, you just have to manage a single mount point or directory rather than half a dozen which must be kept in sync.
Also /usr is not just /usr/bin. Sbin, and lib (and lib64, and lib32) are also part of the usr merge.
That is explained in the “Case for the usr merge” essay: having all the readonly system stuff under a single root directory makes the system much easier to manage, and simplifies useful scenarios like having the system on a network share, or sharing the host’s read-only across guests: with a merged usr, you just have to manage a single mount point or directory rather than half a dozen which must be kept in sync.
Also /usr is not just /usr/bin. Sbin, and lib (and lib64, and lib32) are also part of the usr merge.