Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Dropping split-usr/unmerged-usr support
On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 10:41 PM Wols Lists wrote:
> On 06/04/2022 10:34, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> >> Symlinking /sbin or /usr/sbin binaries to /usr is also a bad concept
> >> IMHO.
> >>
> >> It seems systemd is the new Microsoft ("We know what is good for you;
> >> just accept it!");-)
>
> Well, I saw a link to WHY we have /bin, /usr/bin, /sbin etc. Interesting
> read ...
>
> / was disk0. /usr was apparently originally short for /user, on disk1.
> Then the system disk ran out of space, so they created /usr/bin to have
> more space. So when they got a 3rd disk, they called it /home and moved
> all the user directories across ...
>
Hmm, from what I managed to gather in various old docs, that "3rd disk" was
still /usr2 originally... until SunOS 4.0
,
which decided to implement a read-only /usr and did some major /usr
reorganization – kicked out home directories to /home, logs to /var/adm,
crontabs to /var/spool, and so on. And it apparently had "/bin => usr/bin"
and "/lib => /usr/lib" symlinks as part of that reorganization, in 1989.
(Though it still had a separate /sbin with barely anything except 'init'
and 'mount' inside.)
--
Mantas Mikulėnas
Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Dropping split-usr/unmerged-usr support
On 06/04/2022 10:34, Luca Boccassi wrote:
Symlinking /sbin or /usr/sbin binaries to /usr is also a bad concept
IMHO.
It seems systemd is the new Microsoft ("We know what is good for you;
just accept it!");-)
Well, I saw a link to WHY we have /bin, /usr/bin, /sbin etc. Interesting
read ...
/ was disk0. /usr was apparently originally short for /user, on disk1.
Then the system disk ran out of space, so they created /usr/bin to have
more space. So when they got a 3rd disk, they called it /home and moved
all the user directories across ...
Regards,
Ulrich
Sorry, but you are about ~10 years late to this debate:-) The question
today is not whether it's good or bad, but who's left to do the switch.
We know Fedora/RHEL/CentOS/SUSE/Arch/Ubuntu have done the switch, and
presumably any of their derivatives.
We know Debian is, er, working on it, as per the most recent article on
LWN.
What about other distros that are not derivatives of the aboves and
that use systemd? Does anybody have any insight?
gentoo defaults to OpenRC, but I'm running systemd. As far as I can tell
I appear to have three distinct directories, /bin, /sbin, and /usr
I also have a fourth and fifth distinct directory, /usr/bin and
/usr/sbin. What if any plans there are to merge them I have no clue.
Cheers,
Wol
Re: [systemd-devel] Dropping split-usr/unmerged-usr support
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 4:07 PM Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> As part of our spring cleaning effort, we are considering when to drop
> support for split/unmerged-usr filesystem layouts.
>
> A build-time warning was added last year:
>
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/9afd5e7b975e8051c011ff9c07c95e80bd954469
>
> We are now adding a runtime taint as well.
>
> Which distributions are left running with systemd on a split/unmerged-
> usr system?
Gentoo still supports having /{bin,sbin,lib} and /usr/{bin,sbin,lib}
as separate directories. We do not support officially booting without
/usr mounted (via initramfs), but some users do it anyway.
We are not likely to require merging of / and /usr for the foreseeable
future. We are a "rolling release" distro and basically never require
our users to re-install, which makes large file system migrations
difficult. Also, many of our users would resist any attempt to force
merged-/usr on them.
I think it would be ok if systemd drops support for installing itself
in /lib/systemd; we would just move everything under /usr/lib/systemd,
and possibly set up some symlinks in /lib/systemd for the transition.
We will still need to keep /bin and /sbin in PATH, and we can't assume
that all binaries reside in /usr/bin.
Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Dropping split-usr/unmerged-usr support
On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 8:07 AM Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2022-04-06 at 06:51 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 6:45 AM Luca Boccassi
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2022-04-06 at 08:05 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> > > > > > > Luca Boccassi schrieb am 05.04.2022
> > > > > > > um 22:07 in
> > > > Nachricht <05cf10d04274dcbff07fed88e98dca2eebb24b7d.ca...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > As part of our spring cleaning effort, we are considering when to
> > > > > drop
> > > > > support for split/unmerged-usr filesystem layouts.
> > > > >
> > > > > A build-time warning was added last year:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/9afd5e7b975e8051c011ff9c07c95e80bd
> > > > > 954469
> > > >
> > > > Honestly to me the requirement that /usr be part of the root
> > > > filesystem never had a reasonable argument.
> > > > Instead I think systemd quit the concept of a simple scaled-down
> > > > subset to bring up the system.
> > > > Also with initrd/dracut the concept is even more odd, because the
> > > > /usr found there is just some arbitrary subset of the real /usr
> > > > (similar for other filesystems).
> > > > So why couldn't that work with a really scaled-down /sbin?
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > We are now adding a runtime taint as well.
> > > > >
> > > > > Which distributions are left running with systemd on a
> > > > > split/unmerged-
> > > > > usr system?
> > > > >
> > > > > (reminder: we refer to a system that boots without a populated /usr
> > > > > as
> > > > > split-usr, and a system where bin, sbin and lib* are not symlinks
> > > > > to
> > > > > their counterparts under /usr as unmerged-usr)
> > > >
> > > > Symlinking /sbin or /usr/sbin binaries to /usr is also a bad concept
> > > > IMHO.
> > > >
> > > > It seems systemd is the new Microsoft ("We know what is good for you;
> > > > just accept it!") ;-)
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Ulrich
> > >
> > > Sorry, but you are about ~10 years late to this debate :-) The question
> > > today is not whether it's good or bad, but who's left to do the switch.
> > >
> > > We know Fedora/RHEL/CentOS/SUSE/Arch/Ubuntu have done the switch, and
> > > presumably any of their derivatives.
> > >
> > > We know Debian is, er, working on it, as per the most recent article on
> > > LWN.
> > >
> >
> > Debian is expected to complete this with Debian 12, I believe.
>
> Yeah it's, uhm, complicated :-) Working on it...
>
> > > What about other distros that are not derivatives of the aboves and
> > > that use systemd? Does anybody have any insight?
> > >
> >
> > OpenMandriva and Yocto both haven't done the switch yet, as far as I'm
> > aware. Might be worth reaching out to them and finding out when
> > they're going to do it.
>
> Thanks, I'm not familiar with OpenMandriva at all, is anyone here? Any
> pointers on where to reach out to?
>
You could try filing an issue here:
https://github.com/OpenMandrivaAssociation/distribution
Alternatively, I believe Bernhard Rosenkraenzer (berolinux on GitHub)
is someone to reach out to. He does a lot of OpenMandriva
architectural work.
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Dropping split-usr/unmerged-usr support
On Wed, 2022-04-06 at 06:51 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 6:45 AM Luca Boccassi wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2022-04-06 at 08:05 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> > > > > > Luca Boccassi schrieb am 05.04.2022
> > > > > > um 22:07 in
> > > Nachricht <05cf10d04274dcbff07fed88e98dca2eebb24b7d.ca...@gmail.com>:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > As part of our spring cleaning effort, we are considering when to
> > > > drop
> > > > support for split/unmerged-usr filesystem layouts.
> > > >
> > > > A build-time warning was added last year:
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/9afd5e7b975e8051c011ff9c07c95e80bd
> > > > 954469
> > >
> > > Honestly to me the requirement that /usr be part of the root
> > > filesystem never had a reasonable argument.
> > > Instead I think systemd quit the concept of a simple scaled-down
> > > subset to bring up the system.
> > > Also with initrd/dracut the concept is even more odd, because the
> > > /usr found there is just some arbitrary subset of the real /usr
> > > (similar for other filesystems).
> > > So why couldn't that work with a really scaled-down /sbin?
> > >
> > > >
> > > > We are now adding a runtime taint as well.
> > > >
> > > > Which distributions are left running with systemd on a
> > > > split/unmerged-
> > > > usr system?
> > > >
> > > > (reminder: we refer to a system that boots without a populated /usr
> > > > as
> > > > split-usr, and a system where bin, sbin and lib* are not symlinks
> > > > to
> > > > their counterparts under /usr as unmerged-usr)
> > >
> > > Symlinking /sbin or /usr/sbin binaries to /usr is also a bad concept
> > > IMHO.
> > >
> > > It seems systemd is the new Microsoft ("We know what is good for you;
> > > just accept it!") ;-)
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Ulrich
> >
> > Sorry, but you are about ~10 years late to this debate :-) The question
> > today is not whether it's good or bad, but who's left to do the switch.
> >
> > We know Fedora/RHEL/CentOS/SUSE/Arch/Ubuntu have done the switch, and
> > presumably any of their derivatives.
> >
> > We know Debian is, er, working on it, as per the most recent article on
> > LWN.
> >
>
> Debian is expected to complete this with Debian 12, I believe.
Yeah it's, uhm, complicated :-) Working on it...
> > What about other distros that are not derivatives of the aboves and
> > that use systemd? Does anybody have any insight?
> >
>
> OpenMandriva and Yocto both haven't done the switch yet, as far as I'm
> aware. Might be worth reaching out to them and finding out when
> they're going to do it.
Thanks, I'm not familiar with OpenMandriva at all, is anyone here? Any
pointers on where to reach out to?
Paul, what about the Yocto side? There's the 'usrmerge' DISTRO_FEATURE,
any plans of making that the default, or at least implicitly enabled if
the 'systemd' DISTRO_FEATURE is enabled?
--
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Dropping split-usr/unmerged-usr support
On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 6:45 AM Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2022-04-06 at 08:05 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> > > > > Luca Boccassi schrieb am 05.04.2022
> > > > > um 22:07 in
> > Nachricht <05cf10d04274dcbff07fed88e98dca2eebb24b7d.ca...@gmail.com>:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > As part of our spring cleaning effort, we are considering when to
> > > drop
> > > support for split/unmerged-usr filesystem layouts.
> > >
> > > A build-time warning was added last year:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/9afd5e7b975e8051c011ff9c07c95e80bd
> > > 954469
> >
> > Honestly to me the requirement that /usr be part of the root
> > filesystem never had a reasonable argument.
> > Instead I think systemd quit the concept of a simple scaled-down
> > subset to bring up the system.
> > Also with initrd/dracut the concept is even more odd, because the
> > /usr found there is just some arbitrary subset of the real /usr
> > (similar for other filesystems).
> > So why couldn't that work with a really scaled-down /sbin?
> >
> > >
> > > We are now adding a runtime taint as well.
> > >
> > > Which distributions are left running with systemd on a
> > > split/unmerged-
> > > usr system?
> > >
> > > (reminder: we refer to a system that boots without a populated /usr
> > > as
> > > split-usr, and a system where bin, sbin and lib* are not symlinks
> > > to
> > > their counterparts under /usr as unmerged-usr)
> >
> > Symlinking /sbin or /usr/sbin binaries to /usr is also a bad concept
> > IMHO.
> >
> > It seems systemd is the new Microsoft ("We know what is good for you;
> > just accept it!") ;-)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ulrich
>
> Sorry, but you are about ~10 years late to this debate :-) The question
> today is not whether it's good or bad, but who's left to do the switch.
>
> We know Fedora/RHEL/CentOS/SUSE/Arch/Ubuntu have done the switch, and
> presumably any of their derivatives.
>
> We know Debian is, er, working on it, as per the most recent article on
> LWN.
>
Debian is expected to complete this with Debian 12, I believe.
> What about other distros that are not derivatives of the aboves and
> that use systemd? Does anybody have any insight?
>
OpenMandriva and Yocto both haven't done the switch yet, as far as I'm
aware. Might be worth reaching out to them and finding out when
they're going to do it.
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Dropping split-usr/unmerged-usr support
On Wed, 2022-04-06 at 08:05 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> > > > Luca Boccassi schrieb am 05.04.2022
> > > > um 22:07 in
> Nachricht <05cf10d04274dcbff07fed88e98dca2eebb24b7d.ca...@gmail.com>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > As part of our spring cleaning effort, we are considering when to
> > drop
> > support for split/unmerged-usr filesystem layouts.
> >
> > A build-time warning was added last year:
> >
> > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/9afd5e7b975e8051c011ff9c07c95e80bd
> > 954469
>
> Honestly to me the requirement that /usr be part of the root
> filesystem never had a reasonable argument.
> Instead I think systemd quit the concept of a simple scaled-down
> subset to bring up the system.
> Also with initrd/dracut the concept is even more odd, because the
> /usr found there is just some arbitrary subset of the real /usr
> (similar for other filesystems).
> So why couldn't that work with a really scaled-down /sbin?
>
> >
> > We are now adding a runtime taint as well.
> >
> > Which distributions are left running with systemd on a
> > split/unmerged-
> > usr system?
> >
> > (reminder: we refer to a system that boots without a populated /usr
> > as
> > split-usr, and a system where bin, sbin and lib* are not symlinks
> > to
> > their counterparts under /usr as unmerged-usr)
>
> Symlinking /sbin or /usr/sbin binaries to /usr is also a bad concept
> IMHO.
>
> It seems systemd is the new Microsoft ("We know what is good for you;
> just accept it!") ;-)
>
> Regards,
> Ulrich
Sorry, but you are about ~10 years late to this debate :-) The question
today is not whether it's good or bad, but who's left to do the switch.
We know Fedora/RHEL/CentOS/SUSE/Arch/Ubuntu have done the switch, and
presumably any of their derivatives.
We know Debian is, er, working on it, as per the most recent article on
LWN.
What about other distros that are not derivatives of the aboves and
that use systemd? Does anybody have any insight?
--
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Dropping split-usr/unmerged-usr support
>>> Luca Boccassi schrieb am 05.04.2022 um 22:07 in
Nachricht <05cf10d04274dcbff07fed88e98dca2eebb24b7d.ca...@gmail.com>:
> Hi,
>
> As part of our spring cleaning effort, we are considering when to drop
> support for split/unmerged-usr filesystem layouts.
>
> A build-time warning was added last year:
>
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/9afd5e7b975e8051c011ff9c07c95e80bd
> 954469
Honestly to me the requirement that /usr be part of the root filesystem never
had a reasonable argument.
Instead I think systemd quit the concept of a simple scaled-down subset to
bring up the system.
Also with initrd/dracut the concept is even more odd, because the /usr found
there is just some arbitrary subset of the real /usr (similar for other
filesystems).
So why couldn't that work with a really scaled-down /sbin?
>
> We are now adding a runtime taint as well.
>
> Which distributions are left running with systemd on a split/unmerged-
> usr system?
>
> (reminder: we refer to a system that boots without a populated /usr as
> split-usr, and a system where bin, sbin and lib* are not symlinks to
> their counterparts under /usr as unmerged-usr)
Symlinking /sbin or /usr/sbin binaries to /usr is also a bad concept IMHO.
It seems systemd is the new Microsoft ("We know what is good for you; just
accept it!") ;-)
Regards,
Ulrich
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Luca Boccassi
