Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes: > Ansgar Burchardt writes ("Re: support for merged /usr in Debian"): >> m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes: >> > Thanks to my conversion program in usrmerge there is no need for a flag >> > day, archive rebuilds or similar complexity and we can even continue to >> > support unmerged systems. >> >> Is there any use case that requires supporting unmerged systems? > > Someone has already mentioned mounting /usr ro. But one generally has > to keep /etc rw. I don't think that the right way to address this is > to make /etc a mount point.
Well, that is one of the reasons to move /{s,}bin and /lib to /usr: by doing so mounting /usr read-only covers more static files. /etc can live either on a rw root or on an extra partition (provided the initramfs does the right thing). Note that /etc will *not* move to /usr/etc. > Anotheer example: I have a system which does a rather hackish NFS root > boot. It has its own / but uses /usr from the fileserver. This has > worked surprisingly well for a long time. Hmm, such systems would probably need reworking with a merged-/usr. I think if one does something like this, the system should treat its local / like a initramfs and just chroot into the nfs-provided filesystem. One can mount /etc or other filesystems from the local system too if needed. Also for the general /usr-on-network and /-local case, it is unclear what would need to be provided in /. As far as I understand with more interesting setups, one needs to move more and more of /usr to / to support that... Say for /usr-over-some-encrypted-network or /usr-over-interesting-network-protocol or even /usr-over-wlan. Ansgar