On 10/17/2011 09:02 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> Splitting this up since i'm kind of starting two threads here..
> 
> ----- Documentation discussion -----
> On 16/10/11 02:44 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>>
>> Well, you'll have to define the meaning of "support" in this context. I
>> simply said that it shouldn't be encouraged, with me reason being that
>> it tends to add unnecessary complexity (in violation of the KISS
>> principle [1]).
>>
> 
> I would agree with this (that it shouldn't be encouraged), but I don't
> think the Handbook is encouraging it now, as it is written..

It depends on how you define "encouraging" in this context. The fact
that /usr is shown as a separate partition might be considered
"suggestive" if not "encouraging". If a user takes that suggestion
without knowing the consequences (special initramfs or linuxrc init
wrapper configuration), then then it could cause some disappointment
when they finally discover the consequences.

> ----- Support/implementation discussion -----
> 
>> ... If people want that, I think it's perfectly
>> reasonable to expect them to use either an initramfs or a simple linuxrc
>> approach [2] to ensure that /usr is mounted before init starts. 
> 
> ...this would make sense, although in terms of "support" i think it
> would be appropriate that we would provide this linuxrc wrapper on any
> init system that needs /usr mounted.

If someone wants to take on the burden of maintaining an init wrapper
like that, then I guess that's fine. However, I wouldn't consider it to
be an absolute requirement. I think it would be fine (maybe preferable)
to simply provide a doc that describes how to mount /usr via an
initramfs or linuxrc init wrapper. Such a doc would only be needed by
those users who require that /usr be on a separate partition.
-- 
Thanks,
Zac