| 1 |
On 07/31/2011 05:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:55:23 +0300 |
| 3 |
> Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> I dislike the IUSE="+static" some packages are currently doing to |
| 6 |
>> workaround this, instead of moving the needed shared libs to / |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> I dislike the idea of pciutils and usbutils database(s) in |
| 9 |
>> non-standard location in / to keep udev working |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> I dislike the idea of moving libglib-2.0, libdbus-1, libdbus-glib-1, |
| 12 |
>> and couple of dozen more libs to / |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> I dislike the idea of maintaining and keeping track of the files in / |
| 15 |
>> using files from /usr. Does any of the PMs have check for this, like |
| 16 |
>> NEEDED entries? I can imagine this getting past the maintainers easily |
| 17 |
>> otherwise |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> Most likely still not seeing the full picture here, and just |
| 20 |
>> scratching the surface... |
| 21 |
>> Despite that, I don't have any strong opinion on any of this, just |
| 22 |
>> need to know if I should start moving the files over |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Honestly, I'd rather see system libs and apps being moved to /usr |
| 25 |
> rather than the opposite. IMO the benefit of getting a clear tree is |
| 26 |
> greater than benefits of having separate fs for 'system' and |
| 27 |
> 'non-system' packages which actually tend to randomly depend one on |
| 28 |
> another. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
that's my impression now too since nobody has managed to provide useful |
| 31 |
case for separate /usr, or they have been very vague like adding 1+1 on |
| 32 |
/ and /usr filesystem sizes and counting the risk of corrupted |
| 33 |
filesystem from that (one word: backup) |
| 34 |
and even then they can go with dracut and have the initramfs mount the |
| 35 |
/usr before init |
| 36 |
dracut with it's externsive modules covers the other mentioned cases too |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
so pursuing for getting rid of shared/static -workarounds and / files |
| 39 |
depending on /usr files constistency |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
not to mention avoiding moving a lot of files to / for pursuing that |
| 42 |
otherwise |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
this is starting to look good: |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove#Move_all_to_.2Fusr |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> What's the point of having shared /usr if you need to keep /bin, /lib, |
| 51 |
> /sbin in sync anyway? And considering the above, the number of files to |
| 52 |
> keep separate & synced is growing, and thus our potential / gets bigger |
| 53 |
> and bigger. |
| 54 |
> |
Archives