On 06/02/14 20:09, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote: > > > Le 05.02.2014 19:31, John Hasler a écrit : >> yaro wrote: >>> Separate /usr is unneeded and actually complicates boot for little >>> benefit. >> >> It allows you to mount it read-only (or not at all when there's a >> problem). It only complicates boot due to the practice of putting stuff >> that belongs under / under /usr. > > Do you have some example? I would like to learn that kind of issues > *before* they happen to me :) > >
An fsck error. In which case it's quicker to run e2fsck on just /usr than on the entire / NOTE: I don't see why a "desktop" user would need a separate /usr for any other reason - but I'll keep following the post thread just in case. Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52f35dde.2080...@gmail.com
