| 1 |
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:54:58 +0700 |
| 2 |
Pandu Poluan <pandu@××××××.info> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> > The idea of trying to launch udevd and initialize devices without |
| 5 |
> > the software, installed in /usr, which is required by those devices |
| 6 |
> > is a configuration that causes problems in many real-world, |
| 7 |
> > practical situations. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > The requirement of having /usr on the same partition as / is also a |
| 10 |
> > configuration that causes problems in many real-world, practical |
| 11 |
> > situations. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I quite often read about this, and after some thinking, I have to |
| 15 |
> ask: why? |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I've also thought about this and I also want to ask why? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I stopped using a separate /usr on my workstations a long time ago when |
| 21 |
I realized it was pointless. The days of 5M hard disks when the entire |
| 22 |
OS didn't fit on one are long gone. The days of my software going tits |
| 23 |
up at the drop of a hat requiring a minimal repair environment to fix |
| 24 |
it at boot are also long gone (my desk is littered with LiveCDs and |
| 25 |
bootable flash drives). |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
So I can't find a single good reason why /usr *must* be separate and my |
| 28 |
workstations are the only machines that will ever have hotplug booting |
| 29 |
issues. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I'm even considering changing the install standards for the company |
| 32 |
servers to dispense with separate /usr, as long as there are safeguards |
| 33 |
against clowns who don't read INSTALL files and happily |
| 34 |
accept /usr/local/<package>/var as a storage area. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Alan McKinnnon |
| 38 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives