On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 01:43:14PM +0100, Alessandro Selli wrote: > > A separate /usr might have been introduced for the silliest an maybe > even wrongest of the reasons, fact is that it turned out to be a very > good filesystem layout concept that introduced flexibility and the > possibility of further separation of binaries into essential and > inessential ones.
I separated /usr on my server long ago because it made allocation of disk space to partitions more flexible. This was in the days before LVM. LVM is great, but it makes allocation of nonLVM partitions more difficult (because so much disk space is in the LVM partition). And I've always wondered if LVM gets in the way of atomicity requirements for data bases. Shifting the small complexity of a separate /usr into > another, more complex solution (initramfs) is stupid. It's like telling > experimental aircraft pilots to do away with they back-packed parachute > because it's old technology that was invented by a guy that was afraid > of riding hot air baloons and telling them that they should instead > adopt a modern, more advanced solution: the jet back-pack. > > What's next, merging /var into /usr? Doing away with /boot? Going back > having user's home directories in /usr, since that was it's original use? I remember those days. It confused me for a few minutes when I first saw they were in /home instead. Then I saw the advantages. -- hendrik _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
