On Oct 11, Sven Joachim <svenj...@gmx.de> wrote: > >> We already discussed the idea of dropping support for a separate /usr, > >> and the outcome was a broad consensus for keeping things this way. > > No, we discussed the idea of merging /usr in / (to which I was opposed > > myself as well). > > This is a different concept. > I think Joss is referring to the thread you started at > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/05/msg00075.html and the > conclusion you came to in > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/05/msg00935.html. I am aware of what he is referring to, and it is still a different thing.
So let's look at the reasons against merging /usr in / listed in my final summary. All of them do not apply to merging / in /usr, and actually become arguments in favour of doing it: - NFS: sharing a read only system over NFS becomes much easier (I would say that it actually becomes possible...) - junk hardware: while moving /usr to / may not be possible due to the small size of the root partition, moving / to /usr will be easy - read only system: more parts would be read only - dmcrypt: more parts would not need to be crypted, if desired And then there is the big argument in favour of it: booting without /usr is becoming more and more difficult. The two current solutions for this adopted by udev and the related tools are both suboptimal: waiting in a loop for /usr to appear can fail due to the timeout (and I wonder when we will hit the first deadlock), and moving even more stuff from /usr to / can work only up to a point. -- ciao, Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
