* Kacper Kowalik schrieb am 01.08.11 um 13:32 Uhr: > > 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. >
The point is that /usr/* has much more load and changes than / alone. ANd a full /usr is much more common than a full / if it is seperated. > > * 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 ? Nothing prevents me. But just having /usr seperat is much easier to maintain. And well, the FHS clearly allows a sepearte /usr. Everything that is required to boot belongs to / until other filesystems get mounted. > > > * 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 ? I agree with you here. My point was that with a seperate /usr you can go well without seperate /usr/portage where you cannot without. -Marc PS,OT: /usr/portage always seemed special to me. Would'nt /var/lib/portage be a better place for it? -- 8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317 3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134
pgpt1PN13XRAO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
