| 1 |
On 2013-09-30 00:04, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> It's the general idea that you can leave /usr unmounted until some |
| 4 |
> random arb time later in the startup sequence and just expect things to |
| 5 |
> work out fine that is broken. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> It just happened to work OK for years because nothing happened to use |
| 8 |
> the code in /usr at that point in the sequence. More and more we are |
| 9 |
> seeing that this is no longer the case. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
So basically it wasn't broke before stuff started to use the code in |
| 12 |
/usr. How isn't that breaking? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> So no-one broke it with a specific commit. It has always been broken by |
| 15 |
> design becuase it's a damn stupid idea that just happened to work by |
| 16 |
> fluke. IT and computing is rife with this kind of error. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
If what you are saying is true then *everything* is broken "by design" |
| 19 |
if something isn't available at boot time (may be /usr, may be /var or |
| 20 |
whatever). |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Best regards |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Peter K |
Archives