| 1 |
On Sat 20 August 2011 03:48:18 Dale did opine thusly: |
| 2 |
> Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sat 20 August 2011 02:17:06 Dale did opine thusly: |
| 4 |
> >> It was discussed on -dev so far. This is the subject line: |
| 5 |
> >> |
| 6 |
> >> "Warn users not to do separate /usr partition without proper |
| 7 |
> >> initramfs in the handbook?" |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> I think it will apply to /var to at some point. I think it |
| 10 |
> >> sucks. I have /var on a separate partition and want to put |
| 11 |
> >> /usr on one to but not now. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > Eh? That's fucking braindead. It also violates everything udev |
| 14 |
> > ever intended to do. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > /usr and /var on separate partitions, plus a custom kernel |
| 17 |
> > without an initramfs is *exactly* the most common use case for |
| 18 |
> > Gentoo.... |
| 19 |
> I wish you could convince the devs of that. I already have /var on |
| 20 |
> its own and was planning to put /usr on its own. I'm not now tho. |
| 21 |
> Looks like /, /boot, /home and that's it for the OS part. It |
| 22 |
> downright sucks. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> You planning to explain this to the devs? Maybe you will have |
| 25 |
> better luck. They said it is a dev from Fedora that started this . |
| 26 |
> . . . crap. ;-) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I'll spend some time I don't have reading the archives, then see. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives