On 10/17/2011 09:02 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > Splitting this up since i'm kind of starting two threads here.. > > ----- Documentation discussion ----- > On 16/10/11 02:44 PM, Zac Medico wrote: >> >> Well, you'll have to define the meaning of "support" in this context. I >> simply said that it shouldn't be encouraged, with me reason being that >> it tends to add unnecessary complexity (in violation of the KISS >> principle [1]). >> > > I would agree with this (that it shouldn't be encouraged), but I don't > think the Handbook is encouraging it now, as it is written..
It depends on how you define "encouraging" in this context. The fact that /usr is shown as a separate partition might be considered "suggestive" if not "encouraging". If a user takes that suggestion without knowing the consequences (special initramfs or linuxrc init wrapper configuration), then then it could cause some disappointment when they finally discover the consequences. > ----- Support/implementation discussion ----- > >> ... If people want that, I think it's perfectly >> reasonable to expect them to use either an initramfs or a simple linuxrc >> approach [2] to ensure that /usr is mounted before init starts. > > ...this would make sense, although in terms of "support" i think it > would be appropriate that we would provide this linuxrc wrapper on any > init system that needs /usr mounted. If someone wants to take on the burden of maintaining an init wrapper like that, then I guess that's fine. However, I wouldn't consider it to be an absolute requirement. I think it would be fine (maybe preferable) to simply provide a doc that describes how to mount /usr via an initramfs or linuxrc init wrapper. Such a doc would only be needed by those users who require that /usr be on a separate partition. -- Thanks, Zac
