| 1 |
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 18:22:37 -0500 |
| 2 |
"Mike Edenfield" <kutulu@××××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> I have never personally run into any case |
| 5 |
> where I had a single /+/usr and regretted it, but I *have* encountered |
| 6 |
> situations where I could not get /usr mounted and ended up merging it |
| 7 |
> with /. FWIW, YMMV, etc. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
And why was that, not udev? What is your point, others have avoided |
| 10 |
regretting it by having a seperate /usr. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I can tell you that Pandu's analogy vis a vis Windows is a bit |
| 14 |
> flawed. What Windows has done recently is (by default for clean |
| 15 |
> installs) to split the boot loader and related bootstrap code into a |
| 16 |
> separate partition from the actual operating system. Claiming that |
| 17 |
> this is analogous to / and /usr is quite a stretch. It is much more |
| 18 |
> accurate to make it analogous to / and /boot. The System Partition |
| 19 |
> has no "Windows" files on it, just the equivalent to grub (and it's |
| 20 |
> also used if you have BitLocker, to decrypt your boot partition). |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Which, to me, means it has absolutely nothing to do with the current |
| 23 |
> discussion one way or the other :) |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
He did define the fact that he mentioned it because he claimed the |
| 26 |
repair tools are stored in a small seperate partition like / or root is |
| 27 |
defined in the FHS which means he brought more to the discussion than |
| 28 |
you just have. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
In any case there are major benefits to having Windows with program |
| 31 |
files on a seperate partition and you shouldn't be stopped from having a |
| 32 |
seperate /usr without good reason and which there is not or if there is |
| 33 |
good reason in a hidden agenda/future plan it has not been brought to |
| 34 |
any discussion, note though that lies and mystery have. Broken |
| 35 |
for years indeed, more like tiny issues that few care about and so |
| 36 |
haven't been fixed by default. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
I re-assert that eudevs mentioning of moving potentially less |
| 39 |
stable/audited or even arbitrary code to later in the boot process is |
| 40 |
also welcomed by me. |
Archives