On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 7:39 PM, Michael Mol <mike...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés <can...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Neil Bothwick <n...@digimed.co.uk> wrote: >>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:52:22 -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: >>> >>>> After reading that, and other similar threads, I still don't >>>> understand the benefits of a separated /usr. >>> >>> Putting it on a logical volume is one advantage, allowing /usr to be >>> resized should the need arise. >> >> Why not allow / to be resized entirely? You probably will take the >> machine off-line anyway. > > A few months ago, I had to recover a live Debian machine which had > massive filesystem corruption in /usr; the hard drive it was on had > begun going bad, and it was taking out /usr slowly. > > I wound up being able to recover by doing a full reinstall of all > packages on the live system after mounting /usr into a freshly-mkfs'd > new lvm volume. If I'd taken the system offline, it would have been > much more difficult.
You can always remount / in another LVM module. Really, what's so especial about /usr? > (As it was, I was shocked it worked) > >> >>>> Mounting it read-only >>>> seems the only sensible one, and then I think is better to go all the >>>> way and mount / read-only. >>> >>> Putting /etc on a read-only filesystem seems a really bad idea. >> >> mount -o remount,rw / >> emerge --sync && emerge -uDNv world >> dispatch-conf >> mount -o remount,ro / >> >> Or, if you only want to modify some configuration file (which in a >> sane environment doesn't happen that often): >> >> mount -o remount,rw / >> adduser fulano ... >> mount -o remount,ro / > > So, no hobbyists? Operating a 'sane' environment at home isn't how > I've taught myself Linux. In a production environment, sure; having > everything possible be read-only is nice, from a security standpoint. Then why you want another partition for /usr? >> >> Again, I don't see the reason for a separated /usr. But *again*, if >> that's what you want, you will be able to do it. You will just need an >> initramfs. > > Yeah, great. Used to be, I could configure needed components to be > built-ins in the kernel. Yeah, first time I installed Linux, it required 512 Mb (if I installed X), and 16 Mb of memmory. Change happens. I welcome it happily, because that's how we progress and get even better stuff. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
