On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 07:03:25PM +0200, Nuno J. Silva wrote: > On 2012-12-23, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 12:22:24 +0200 > > nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva) wrote: > >> On 2012-12-18, Alan McKinnon wrote: > >> > On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 09:08:53 -0500 > >> > Michael Mol <mike...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > This sentence summarizes my understanding of your post nicely: > >> >> Now, why is /usr special? It's because it contains executable code > >> >> the system might require while launching. > >> > Now there are only two approaches that could solve that problem: > >> > 1. Avoid it entirely > >> > 2. Deal with it using any of a variety of bootstrap techniques > >> > #1 is handled by policy, whereby any code the system might require > >> > while launching is not in /usr. > >> > #2 already has a solution, it's called an init*. Other solutions > >> > exist but none are as elegant as a throwaway temporary filesystem > >> > in RAM. > >> What about just mounting /usr as soon as the system boots? > > Please read the thread next time. The topic under discussion is > > solutions to the problem of not being able to do exactly that. > Then I suppose you can surely explain in a nutshell why can't init > scripts simply do that? Because certain people with influence have rearranged the filesystem so that programs within /usr are absolutely necessary for booting; they are needed _before_ init has a chance to mount /usr. So either /usr has to be in the root partition, or crazy kludges need to be used to mount /usr before the kernel runs init. > -- > Nuno Silva (aka njsg) > http://njsg.sdf-eu.org/ -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
