Re: [gentoo-server] remote /usr

[Christian Bricart]

Alex Efros schrieb:
> [..]
>
> If you remote-mount root (using network boot?), /usr and everything else ;-)
> than that's really can make life much easier, but this setup has nothing
> with current topic. I'm asking about configuration where you may boot with
> root but without /usr - that's why /etc/localtime symlink replaced by copy
> of timezone file, grep compiled without perl regex support, etc.
>
I think the point is (and that's why it's written in the FHS), that you
need a sane system to e.g. boot into single user mode.
First, imagine a setup that has different mount points (not necessarily
mounted from a remote system) for the different directories in he tree -
this setup is quite common and endorsed by many people - to have maybe
the files on different filesystems (e.g. ext2, ext3, reiser, XFS, JFS)
as different filesystems have deviant behavior regarding specific
performance issues, or provide e.g. ACL that you don't need on other
parts in your tree, or are to be located on different disks/IO systems,
etc..
In spite of that, you'll need a sane system when going into single user
mode (maybe to fix a broken partition - that might be /usr) or even
networkless boot.
This is not limited to /usr, but any path below the root-FS defined by
FHS in its first chapter.

Finally I think that asking for "real life scenarios" or "is this still
practicable nowadays" is not the point. The behavior is a principle
written down in FHS - that stands to regulate for standards.
You may say that your setup(s) does/do not need those premises - but
that's ok. There my be others that rely on them.. for various reasons..

Christian (who once thought /opt was a needless addition to the tree and
changed his mind about it - substituting it with averseness to /srv ;-) )

-- 
gentoo-server@g.o mailing list