Re: [gentoo-user] Re: After /usr conflation: why not copy booting software to /sbin rather than initramfs?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 19:55:37 +0200
che@××××××.se wrote:

> Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> writes:
>
> > On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 14:26:46 +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> >
> >> > As you move more and more software off of /usr into / you start
> >> > to realize that the idea of "tiny partition that contains just
> >> > what I need to boot and mount /usr" is becoming "not so tiny"
> >> > anymore. The distinction between what is "boot" software versus
> >> > "user" software gets less clear.
> >>
> >> Again, isn't this the same for an initramfs?
> >
> > No, because an initramfs only needs enough to mount / and /usr, then
> > everything else comes from the usual source. If you're not using and
> > fancy block devices, the initramfs only needs busybox and an init
> > script. Even adding LVM, RAID and encryption only requires three
> > more binaries - and those are all disposed of once switch_root is
> > run and the tmpfs released.
>
> The question remains. If it's possible to do that from an initramfs,
> then shouldn't it be possible to put the same tools and binarias on /,
> and mount /usr early?

Of course it's possible, it's merely a gigantic list of cd commands.

The question is, is it advisable?

I offer you two choices:

a. Move a few commands into an initramfs, truly only the ones you
really do need, or
b. Move 7G of files onto / (i.e. everything) and lose any benefit you
(and everyone else with different ideas to you) may want by having a
separate /usr. Oh, and you get to deal with finding the hardcoded paths
and fixing the code yourself.

Those are your choices. Pick one.



-- 
Alan McKinnnon
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com