| 1 |
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Someone mentioned NFS mount on /usr. Do we have other reasons? How |
| 3 |
> many users that might be? |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> I dislike the documentation not being clear on separate /usr, that it |
| 6 |
> should only be used if you *really* need it due to the potential problems |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Well, I ended up that way from following the official documentation |
| 9 |
the better part of a decade ago: |
| 10 |
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-x86+raid+lvm2-quickinstall.xml |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Sure, I guess I could try to move root to the lvm as well to expand it |
| 13 |
enough and switch over to genkernel. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
You know, maybe a way around all of this would be for all of the |
| 16 |
various distros and major FOSS packages to get together and come up |
| 17 |
with some kind of standard for what goes in what directory. Maybe we |
| 18 |
could call it something like the "Filesystem Hierarchy Standard." |
| 19 |
Then we don't have to argue on mailing lists about whether it is |
| 20 |
appropriate to rely on file in /usr during boot. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
It seems like the proper solution is for all packages in the tree to |
| 23 |
be FHS-compliant, either because we patched them and bug upstream |
| 24 |
about it, or because we exclude them. That said, there is little |
| 25 |
point if we're the only distro doing this. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
How many packages are we actually talking about? Is there any kind of |
| 28 |
consensus in the FOSS community beyond Gentoo that FHS has had its |
| 29 |
day? What is the policy for other distros? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Rich |
Archives