* Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto schrieb am 01.08.11 um 11:19 Uhr: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 01-08-2011 08:31, Eray Aslan wrote: > > On 2011-08-01 10:23 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > >> that's my impression now too since nobody has managed to provide > >> useful case for separate /usr, or they have been very vague > > > > I will switch if I have to but saying / and /usr on the same > > filesystem is the better technical solution just annoys me. > > > > I understand if going against upstream and keeping them seperate is > > not worth the hassle and noone steps up to do it. But then we should > > say so. Please don't kid yourself (or others). > > I agree with Eray. Furthermore, please stop trying to reverse "the > game". It's those that want to break existing policies and conventions > that have to justify why they want to do that, not those that want to > keep using what has worked for years. You may not need or like it, but I > want to be able to use partition schemes like the following without > needing to use an initramfs: > > /dev/md4 /boot > /dev/md2 / > /dev/sda1 swap > /dev/sdb1 swap > > /dev/vg/home /home > /dev/vg/usr /usr > /dev/vg/portage /usr/portage > /dev/vg/distfiles /usr/portage/distfiles > /dev/vg/var /var > /dev/vg/vtmp /var/tmp > /dev/vg/www /var/www > /dev/vg/repos /home/repositories > /dev/vg/release /home/release > > Also, desktop users that don't split the /usr path might not like the > "stress" that /usr/portage will add to the / partition - not to talk > about the size and inode constraints. > > With the above design, I have on a system the following disk space use: > > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > rootfs 9,4G 262M 8,7G 3% / > > I'm growing tired of how complex and over-designed desktop technologies > that hide stuff from the users keep trying to break the "unix way" and > convince us they're "awesome". No, I don't need or want *kit, groups > exist for something. No, applications that do "magic stuff" with dbus > and xml (and I like xml) on the users back and hide how X work aren't a > "good thing(tm)". > > Finally, Gentoo's init system is and will likely be for a long time > openrc, so stop trying to push crazy or experimental init systems - most > with a seemingly "poor design" and unable to do what an init system > needs to do (start and stop services).
I fully agree with you here! I always considered systems with just one big / as badly designed. It's simply not the unix way. Sure it makes some things easier in the first place. But that does not mean that it is a better technical solution. -Marc -- 8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317 3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134
pgprJi4jLKHcH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
