| 1 |
Am 29.09.2013 13:03, schrieb Greg Woodbury: |
| 2 |
> On 09/29/2013 06:55 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> why do you bring up udev and systemd AT ALL? |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> They are not the problem or the reason why seperate /usr is prone to |
| 7 |
>> break. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
> Except that systemd *is* why a seperate /usr is broken now. |
| 10 |
> Parts of the libraries that systemd depend on we *deliberately* placed |
| 11 |
> in /usr despite the fact that they are needed to bbring the system to |
| 12 |
> an operational state. For *years* things required to boot the system |
| 13 |
> were defined to be in the root file system, and items not required |
| 14 |
> until after mounting had been accomplished were to be placed in /usr. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> BTW: There is a standard (The File System Hierarch Standard - FSS) |
| 17 |
> that existed and described this behaviour. It was killed off by |
| 18 |
> deliberate vendor refusals to support or adhere to it. In |
| 19 |
> frustration, the folks involved simply gave up. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
things were broken way before that. As much as I hate systemd, it is not |
| 23 |
the root cause of the problem. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
The problems were caused by people saying that seperate /usr was a good |
| 26 |
idea, so / would not fill up and similar idiocies. The problems were |
| 27 |
caused by people saying that lvm is a good idea - for desktops. Those |
| 28 |
people who are fighting against the kernel auto assembling raids are to |
| 29 |
blame too. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Systemd is just another point in a very long list. |
Archives