On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 12:17:21PM +0000, Roger Leigh wrote: > 1) A separate /usr serves no practical purpose on a Debian/Devuan system > > Historically, /usr was separately mountable, shareable over NFS. With a > package manager like dpkg, / and /usr are an integrated, managed whole. > Sharing over NFS is not practical since the managed files span both parts, > and you can't split the package database between separate systems. Modern > disk sizes make partitioning a separate /usr unnecessary and undesirable. > (Both are of course /possible/, but there is precious little to gain by > doing so.)
Actually, even on non-modern disk sizes that split isn't good. A decade ago, on N700/N800/N900 Nokia had a tiny boot $DISK and another 64GB in size but noticeably slower. It turned out that / vs /usr is no good for them, and they instead opted for most non-essential binaries on a separate partition on the 64GB eMMC. Both / and /usr were on the small disk with most programs symlinked to the filesystem on /opt . Meow! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ I've read an article about how lively happy music boosts ⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ productivity. You can read it, too, you just need the ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ right music while doing so. I recommend Skepticism ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ (funeral doom metal). _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
