On Fri, 06 Jan 2012 19:59:45 -0500 Olivier Crête <tes...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 19:41 -0500, Walter Dnes wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 01:51:26PM -0500, Olivier Cr?te wrote > > > > > No no no, the idea is that once all binaries are in /usr, you can > > > easily share /usr between different systems and do updates in a > > > sane way.. You can also mount /usr read-only, but still have / be > > > read-write. > > > > One size does not fit all. It breaks Gentoo horribly. Here's my > > setup > > > > waltdnes@d530 / $ du -s /usr > > 3057917 usr > > > > waltdnes@d530 /usr $ du -s /usr/portage > > 1394646 /usr/portage > > > > waltdnes@d530 /usr $ du -s /usr/src > > 665069 /usr/src > > > > In my 3 gig /usr directory, over 2 gigs are devoted to > > Gentoo-specific stuff that a binary distro like Redhat does not > > require. What do we do if /usr is read-only? Symlink or bindmount > > onto it? > > You don't understand the purpose of read-only /usr. It has nothing to > do with source vs binary. It is for when you have many machines that > are identical or at least similar. > > The idea is that you can mount the same /usr on many machines (using > NFS or something like that). So you can have a relatively small / as > a r/w nfsroot (containing /etc, /var, /tmp, etc, etc), and then > share /usr among all the machines in your cluster or machine room or > your many user desktops. > > With the current system, you either have to maintain in sync > the /bin, /sbin, /usr, etc separately, making life harder for > everyone. > > But clearly, you've never been the sysadmin of that kind of setup. > Not saying it's just you, but people should stop being dicks. Being antagonistic against everyone is not getting us anywhere and only serves to divide the community. People shouldn't use the hate in dealing with whether or not to change on other people, use it on the actual argument :D -- Matthew Thode (prometheanfire)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
