Re: [gentoo-user] /dev/sda* missing at boot

[Canek Peláez Valdés]

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:37 PM, David W Noon <dwnoon@××××××××.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 23:54:57 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote about Re:
> [gentoo-user] /dev/sda* missing at boot:
>
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:52:22 -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>>
>> > After reading that, and other similar threads, I still don't
>> > understand the benefits of a separated /usr.
>>
>> Putting it on a logical volume is one advantage, allowing /usr to be
>> resized should the need arise.
>
> More than this, one can put /usr on a stripe set so that /usr/bin
> and /usr/lib, two of the directories with the highest I/O traffic, can
> be made more performant.  But this requires LVM, RAID or some blend of
> both.  This, in turn, precludes that it be merged with /, unless the
> initramfs grows even more to handle those extra DASD management
> facilities.
>
> The more I think about this merge of / and /usr, the dumber I think the
> idea is.  As I wrote in an earlier message on this list, the initramfs
> will be many times larger than the kernel itself.  Indeed, my /boot
> partition is only 32 MiB, and that will be too small to contain all the
> extra libraries and programs to run the initramfs script.

I don't see any problem with an initramfs larger than the kernel. It
will handle a lot of stuff. But if you don't want to change your /boot
partition, then don't upgrade to new kernels.

Change happens.

>> > Mounting it read-only
>> > seems the only sensible one, and then I think is better to go all
>> > the way and mount / read-only.
>>
>> Putting /etc on a read-only filesystem seems a really bad idea.
>
> To say the least.

It works, and it makes life easier for upstream. Which are the ones
writting the code.

Regards.
-- 
Canek Peláez Valdés
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México