Re: [gentoo-user] separate / and /usr to require initramfs 2013-11-01

[Dale]

Michael Hampicke wrote:
> Am 28.09.2013 17:06, schrieb Dale:
>> Michael Hampicke wrote:
>>> Am 28.09.2013 13:32, schrieb Tanstaafl:
>>>> On 2013-09-27 7:10 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote:
>>>>> No really,*why exactly*?
>>>>
>>>> Because that was the RECOMMENDED WAY IN THE GENTOO HANDBOOK when I
first
>>>> set this system up many years ago.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Where did you read that? According to the 2004 handbook the default
>>> partition scheme was:
>>>
>>> Partition    Filesystem    Size    Description
>>> /dev/hda1    ext2    32M    Boot partition
>>> /dev/hda2    (swap)    512M    Swap partition
>>> /dev/hda3    ext3    Rest of the disk    Root partition
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
http://web.archive.org/web/20040419042803/http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?full=1
>>>
>>
>> I guess I got mine from the handbook back in early 2003.  That is when I
>> did my first install.
>
> This is the default partition scheme from 2001 according to the
handbook :-)
>
> Partition    Size    Type
> boot partition, containing kernel(s) and boot information    ~100
> Megabytes    ReiserFS recommended, ext2 ok
> root partition, containing main filesystem (/usr, /home, etc)    >=1.5
> Gigabytes    ReiserFS recommended, ext2 ok
> swap partition (no longer a 128 Megabyte limit)    >=128 Megabytes
Linux swap
>
> No seperate /usr either

Well, it was there when I followed it otherwise, I wouldn't have known
to even do it.  I all but copy and pasted the instructions from the
install guide.

>
>
>>
>> Also, as I stated, I have / and /boot on regular partitions and
>> everything else on LVM.  Care to guess why I don't have / on a LVM too?
>> Yep, to avoid the init thingy.  I don't have /boot on LVM because grub
>> didn't support it.
>>
>
> I know that you want the avoid an initramfs given your experience from
> mandrake lot's of years ago. The solution now is to merge /usr to / or
> risk that one day your system won't boot.
>
> I know that some changes are hard to overcome, but that does not mean
> you can look away :-)
>

Yep, it could lead to some changes but the init thingy isn't the only
change it could lead too.  I said that before and I'll say it again, I'm
not going to start trying to pull my hair out over the init thingy. 
First time it fails, it's been fun.  I'll just move along to something
else.  I did it once a long time ago and am not so locked in that I
can't do it again.  See, I can change when needed.  It's not that I
don't want to learn new things, I just don't want to learn old failed
things.

Dale

:-)  :-)

-- 
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or
how you interpreted my words!