1 |
On 24/12/12 23:52, Dale wrote: |
2 |
> Kevin Chadwick wrote: |
3 |
>>> Are there any other cases, apart from emotional attachment based on |
4 |
>>> inertia, where a separate / and /usr are desirable? As I see it, there |
5 |
>>> is only the system, and it is an atomic unit. |
6 |
>> You should really read the thread before posting. |
7 |
>> |
8 |
> I suspect that Alan has. Alan is not known to post without knowing what |
9 |
> he is talking about. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> Dale |
12 |
> |
13 |
> :-) :-) |
14 |
> |
15 |
I used initrd's many years ago, and separate /usr and/ until on a redhat |
16 |
system I rebooted with an out of sequence initrd and kernel on a |
17 |
critical server (the sort of thing that puts your employment at risk |
18 |
when there are 20 odd developers using it ...) |
19 |
|
20 |
ok, eliminate that point of failure! I then stopped using init*'s until |
21 |
recently and surprise, never had an init* failure until this latest |
22 |
fiasco has caused me to go back to using init*'s. I have had a couple of |
23 |
failures - mostly to do with complexity and trying to juggle more |
24 |
items..and missing something. This is something binary distros are less |
25 |
prone to than gentoo. And my workload/system complexity is now higher |
26 |
as well - all round loss ... |
27 |
|
28 |
As far as the system being "atomic", that has been one of microsofts |
29 |
Achilles heals for many years - so tightly integrated one minor failure |
30 |
takes out everything. I separate / and /usr, its for reliability AND |
31 |
flexibility as far as I am concerned - yes I can change what I do, but |
32 |
why change for something that gives me less? I use LVM on everything |
33 |
except laptops and at least a couple of times a year move things |
34 |
around. I have had major disasters in /usr that were insulated from the |
35 |
rest of the system, I can have a system stay up while I do major |
36 |
changes, so / and /usr as one will be a problem for me. |
37 |
|
38 |
I can see where Lennart and co are coming from, but their target is not |
39 |
reliability, flexibility or long term use ... its run on everything, and |
40 |
throwaway and start again if you want a change - the microsoft approach |
41 |
if you like. It seems to be driven by the cloud and a more throwaway |
42 |
mindset for computing than we are used to, or what gentoo is designed for. |
43 |
|
44 |
Not all the proposed changes are bad ... a read only /usr would be nice, |
45 |
but I object to being forced into what I regard as an unreliable |
46 |
configuration (or use unreliable, crappy software, eg pulse audio!) |
47 |
because of these changes - and for those who say I have a choice ... |
48 |
thats correct, my choice will be eudev. |
49 |
|
50 |
I can see a split coming with two design choices, eudev like with |
51 |
reliably and flexibility at the core for servers, and a more MS like |
52 |
desktop approach for RH and the other big distros as they find |
53 |
themselves being abandoned in the server market. I suspect the thing to |
54 |
watch will be where RH Enterprise goes in its next few versions. |
55 |
|
56 |
So roll on eudev! |
57 |
|
58 |
(and happy Christmas to those celebrating!) |
59 |
BillK |