On 08/31/2012 03:39 AM, Steve Langasek wrote: > It only requires us to ensure /usr is mounted before > init is started. >
Which I don't think is a good idea. > - /usr on a separate filesystem without the use of an initramfs: not > supported... and no discernable user demand for this. > Well, let's say I have a big crash, and I want to recover, and I need to access /etc/lvm/archive in a single user, with of course my /usr in a bad state, and I wouldn't be able to mount it for various reasons. Let's say, an HDD crash, which is very common. If I need to have /usr mounted before init starts, then I'm more or less dead, and I'll have to get a recovery CD / USB. If I don't need /usr, everything is fine, I can boot into single user mode, and repair. Guess which situation I prefer? Now, you tell me: what are the advantage of requiring having everything in /usr exactly? I really don't get what the advantage is. On 08/31/2012 03:39 AM, Steve Langasek wrote: > However, I struggled to formulate a concrete > scenario where losing support for that last configuration would actually > make a difference. > You must have not read some of my posts then. > No one in the various threads on debian-devel has presented such a scenario. > They've all been arguing the straw man that "/usr as a separate fs is not > supported", which is not what's on the table. > Ditto. We did give concrete examples were recovery would be harder with things in /usr rather than in /. Also, please make the point into why having stuff in /usr is to be preferred. Or is it that the *only* argument that you have is that we are polluted by RedHat crap? If so, why shouldn't we consider switching to an alternative of udev like mdev, if its development goes on the right direction, for Jessie? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50408642.20...@debian.org