On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 16:41 +0200, Antony Stone wrote: > https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/TheCaseForTheUsrMerge/ if > you want to start feeling annoyed as well as surprised.
Dunno, that one actually makes a lot of sense. Applying the logic of Chesterton's Fence here seems sound. They did their homework in researching the original reason for the tradition, carefully examined the question of whether those reasons still apply and the consequences of the change. The original reason no longer applies, we should all agree on that point, right? We don't NEED to install on a small volume and then mount the large stuff on a different media, even when we install /usr on a different filesystem it is almost always a partition on the same physical device. So then we only have the question of whether it is best to put everything down /usr or eliminate it. The arguments they advance for snapshotting, using a read-only mount or network share of pretty much the entire non-host specific portion of the OS is a pretty good reason to pick putting everything down /usr. Counterarguments are few. If you don't want to use an initrd, just avoid making /usr a mountpoint. As for rescue, in the before time when the /usr split occurred, cheap live CD/USB stick rescue media was not an option. It is now.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
