W dniu 01.08.2011 13:12, Marc Schiffbauer pisze: > * Samuli Suominen schrieb am 01.08.11 um 09:23 Uhr: >> On 07/31/2011 05:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:55:23 +0300 >>> Samuli Suominen <ssuomi...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> >>>> I dislike the IUSE="+static" some packages are currently doing to >>>> workaround this, instead of moving the needed shared libs to / >>>> >>>> I dislike the idea of pciutils and usbutils database(s) in >>>> non-standard location in / to keep udev working >>>> >>>> I dislike the idea of moving libglib-2.0, libdbus-1, libdbus-glib-1, >>>> and couple of dozen more libs to / >>>> >>>> I dislike the idea of maintaining and keeping track of the files in / >>>> using files from /usr. Does any of the PMs have check for this, like >>>> NEEDED entries? I can imagine this getting past the maintainers easily >>>> otherwise >>>> >>>> Most likely still not seeing the full picture here, and just >>>> scratching the surface... >>>> Despite that, I don't have any strong opinion on any of this, just >>>> need to know if I should start moving the files over >>> >>> Honestly, I'd rather see system libs and apps being moved to /usr >>> rather than the opposite. IMO the benefit of getting a clear tree is >>> greater than benefits of having separate fs for 'system' and >>> 'non-system' packages which actually tend to randomly depend one on >>> another. >> >> that's my impression now too since nobody has managed to provide useful >> case for separate /usr, or they have been very vague like adding 1+1 on >> / and /usr filesystem sizes and counting the risk of corrupted >> filesystem from that (one word: backup) >> and even then they can go with dracut and have the initramfs mount the >> /usr before init >> dracut with it's externsive modules covers the other mentioned cases too >
I'm responding to this particular mail cause it's last in queue and because it replicates things already mentioned before. I am a zeleous follower of having seperate /usr partition, thus seeing moot arguments that goes "in favour" of "my" case is pretty annoying. > * For example if a filesystem fills 100%. Imagine your /usr is 100% > full by accident. Thats bs, cause / can fill out even when you have /usr seperate. Even faster cause usually you've got very small / like <<1Gb. You miss one thing that accidentally writes to / and you're as much toasted. > * IMO its a good idea to seperate mostly static filesystems from > those with many writes How mering / and /usr increase that? What prevents you having separate partition for heavy write areas inside /usr ? > * Some people want a read-only /usr Yes, that's only reasonable argument here. > * /usr/portage can get very huge and is often written to. With > / and /usr being on the same FS you really want to have > /usr/portage on a seperate FS then Even with separate /usr it's good to have separate partition for /usr/portage. You can have partition with small blocks and large no. of inodes this way. How does that prevents merging / and /usr ? Cheers, Kacper
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
