On 08/31/2012 11:52 PM, Peter Samuelson wrote: > I guess I can understand that you want your /usr to be resizeable
Not only this. I want it on a RAID10 or RAID5 which goes faster than my / that is hosted in a slower RAID1. > but > really, life is so much simpler when you just go ahead and create a 12 > GB root filesystem (and no separate /usr) and be done with it. Maybe more simple, but then I will loose the advantages that I already explained. And more importantly: I don't care simple. > The > days have long passed when that 10 or 11 GB of wasted space was > anything to worry about. > This has nothing to do with the amount of space. But if you want to go on that ground... Today, you say 10GB. What about in 5 years? Can you easily predict what will be my needs? I don't. > I always thought reads were pretty harmless and it's mostly writes you > have to worry about (both for bugs in the OS FS, and for the physical > media). And both / and /usr should have very few writes, > percentage-wise. > It depends what you do, I'd say. But yes of course, you'd have very few, and even maybe zero once the system is setup, writes on /usr. But if your computer has a lot of activities taking a lot of RAM, chances are that stuff will be kicked out of the cache and get read again. > I used to think keeping / fully self-contained was useful. But it is a > non-zero amount of effort, and I'm becoming convinced that these days, > the separate /usr is going the way of the shared /usr/share. > > Peter > Isn't it because you are just becoming a bit lazy? :) You could also have tell me to use just one single partition, and that having a separate /tmp, /var and so on totally useless too. We could argue as well during huge threads about it. :) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50410280.4030...@debian.org
