On 8/5/19 5:45 AM, Mick wrote:
Interesting concept, thanks for sharing.
You're welcome.
Unless I misunderstand how this will work, it will create duplication
of the fs for /bin and /sbin, which will both use extra space and
require managing.
Yes, it will create some duplication. Though I don't think that /all/
of the contents of /bin and /sbin would need to be duplicated. Think
about the minimum viable binaries that are needed.
Perhaps something like busybox would even suffice.
Will you mount -bind the underlying fs in fstab?
You could. I have done so in some VMs that I've tested various things.
My use case on my VPS is for an encrypted data partition. So I have
things like the following:
/home -> /var/LUKS/home
/etc/mail -> /var/LUKS/etc/mail
/etc/bind -> /var/LUKS/etc/bind
/var/LUKS/home/gtaylor does have an absolute minimum directory structure
so that I can ssh in with my key and run a script to unlock / open and
mount the LUKS volume and start some services (mostly email and DNS
related).
How will you make sure installations of the same binaries are
installed/copied in both underlying and mounted /usr/* fs and kept
in sync? By changing all affected ebuilds?
I don't have an answer to this qustion. I've not needed an answer to
this question.
I think I would likely create a script that would copy specific files
from the /usr path to the underlying /(usr) path as needed.
I doubt there would be many files.
I don't see any need to alter an untold number of ebuilds for a system
architecture / file system decision.
It is a hack alright, to restore the previous default /usr
functionality, so a useful option to consider.
That's why I shared it.
It's also an example of an idea that works for my use case that you are
free to take and modify for your use case. I don't need to know about
your use case, much less have an answer for it, when I'm sharing my use
case. (Harking back to the different types of communities in the
previous email.)
If I were to be asked my preference would be to revert the systemd
inspired changes which caused this loss of functionality. ;-)
Fair enough.
Though I would question just how much and what is broken by having a
separate /usr file system without systemd. }:-) Specifically, is it
truly broken? Or does it need some minor tweaks?
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
