On 2011-08-11 12:56 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> The problem of filling up
> / is PEBKAC primarily, and can happen equally for / (think /root), /usr
> on /, /var on /.
This does not match with my experience. Over the years, I have seen
/var filling up several times on servers, but not /. Please
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10-08-2011 21:56, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:57:30PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
>> Sorry, I should have been more clear here. Mounting /var doesn't
>> fill up the root partition, but if you don't want to use the
>> initram
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
The final solution in this thread:
TL;DR version: If your /usr is NOT on /, you MUST use an initramfs.
More detailed:
1. If you want /usr or /var on separate partitions (not LVM or anything
elsewhere userspace action is required to make the block devices
usable),
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:57:30PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> Sorry, I should have been more clear here. Mounting /var doesn't fill up
> the root partition, but if you don't want to use the initramfs, this
> means that /var must also exist on the root partition, which can create
> more of a conc
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 04:42:04PM -0500, Dale wrote:
> For the record, I think /usr should work on a separate partition as
> well.
You're entirely missing the point of this thread.
> One reason, I would like to use LVM on all but my / file system.
> This is something I been fiddling with for
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:47:18PM -0500, Dale wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:49:38AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
I am concerned about /var being included in this because of the
potential of filling up the root partition.
Err, I don't follow. Ho
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 08:02:44PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:49:38AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> > I am concerned about /var being included in this because of the
> > potential of filling up the root partition.
> Err, I don't follow. How does mounting /var fill u
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:47:18PM -0500, Dale wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:49:38AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> >> I am concerned about /var being included in this because of the
> >> potential of filling up the root partition.
> > Err, I don't follow. How does mounting /var fill up the
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:49:38AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
I am concerned about /var being included in this because of the
potential of filling up the root partition.
Err, I don't follow. How does mounting /var fill up the root partition?
If you tak
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:49:38AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 12:46:04AM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > The minimal initramfs would do the following.
> >
> > 1. Mount devtmpfs/sysfs/procfs as needed to access devices.
> > 2. Mount real_root to /newroot
> > 3. Read /n
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 12:46:04AM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> The minimal initramfs would do the following.
>
> 1. Mount devtmpfs/sysfs/procfs as needed to access devices.
> 2. Mount real_root to /newroot
> 3. Read /newroot/etc/initramfs.mount and /newroot/etc/fstab
> 4.1. If /newroot/etc/in
On 6 August 2011 20:52, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > Then yes, such minimal initramfs should propably be covered in the
> > > embedded's documentation, but otherwise trying to avoid dracut is
> > > reinventing the wheel...
> >
> > You may be right, but to my understanding such a minimalistic initrd
On Sat, 6 Aug 2011 17:52:54 +0200
Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> > Then yes, such minimal initramfs should propably be covered in the
> > embedded's documentation, but otherwise trying to avoid dracut is
> > reinventing the wheel...
>
> You may be right, but to my understanding such a minimalistic in
* Samuli Suominen schrieb am 05.08.11 um 15:43 Uhr:
> On 08/05/2011 04:12 PM, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> > OTOH the initrd that Robin described would be a very static solution
> > with almost no dependencies, so if genkernel had a USE flag like
> > "dracut" it would be possible to build it without d
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 07:42:29PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:06:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> > That said, I'm a bit hesitant to describing that we "recommend" it
> > regardless of the situation. What is wrong with describing when? At least
> > inform our users
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:37 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> Hi Rich,
>
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 09:04:50PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:42 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>> > On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:06:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
>> >> How does the tool that creates an i
Hi Rich,
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 09:04:50PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:42 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:06:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> >> How does the tool that creates an initramfs know which files to copy from
> >> /usr and /var anyho
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:42 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:06:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
>> How does the tool that creates an initramfs know which files to copy from
>> /usr and /var anyhow?
>
> My understanding is that nothing gets copied from /usr and /var, and it
Hi,
my knowledge of booting from an initramfs is limited right now, so keep
that in mind. However, I will attempt to answer some of your questions.
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:06:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> I'm all in favor of documenting what an initramfs does (or at least what it
> is su
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 09:57:08AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> In any case, as long as a solution exists for md+lvm+luks+/usr before
> we start breaking more stuff than is already broken, then we should be
> fine. Having more than one optional solution is fine. While I don't
> think that gentoo
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 08:25:19AM -0500, Matthew Summers wrote:
> This, at least to me, seems like an excellent opportunity to nicely
> document what can be done with an initramfs (in basic and advanced
> forms, as there are some really fancy things one can do with
> initramfs's), and how Gentoo i
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Matthew Summers
wrote:
> In point of fact all modern Linux kernels have an initramfs built in
> now, that when empty is effectively bypassed, so there is no wheel
> reinvention. To quote the docs [1]
Yes, but that embedded initramfs doesn't actually do much of anyt
On 08/05/2011 04:12 PM, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> * Rich Freeman schrieb am 05.08.11 um 14:42 Uhr:
>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
>>> * Robin H. Johnson schrieb am 05.08.11 um 02:46 Uhr:
>>> [...]
That leaves the only reasonable solution as #2. In terms of minimal
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
>> * Robin H. Johnson schrieb am 05.08.11 um 02:46 Uhr:
>> [...]
>>> That leaves the only reasonable solution as #2. In terms of minimal
>>> impact, I propose that we offer users with a s
* Rich Freeman schrieb am 05.08.11 um 14:42 Uhr:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> > * Robin H. Johnson schrieb am 05.08.11 um 02:46 Uhr:
> > [...]
> >> That leaves the only reasonable solution as #2. In terms of minimal
> >> impact, I propose that we offer users with a s
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> * Robin H. Johnson schrieb am 05.08.11 um 02:46 Uhr:
> [...]
>> That leaves the only reasonable solution as #2. In terms of minimal
>> impact, I propose that we offer users with a static system an absolutely
>> minimal initramfs, that _just
* Robin H. Johnson schrieb am 05.08.11 um 02:46 Uhr:
[...]
> That leaves the only reasonable solution as #2. In terms of minimal
> impact, I propose that we offer users with a static system an absolutely
> minimal initramfs, that _just_ mounts the required directories. No
> modules, no LVM, no MD,
I've mainly said out of this discussion until now, because I've been
quite busy.
The root problem here is that there are starting to be a lot of cases
where rule run by udev require that /usr [1] and potentially /var [2] or
more are available when the udev rule runs.
To the best of my knowledge,
28 matches
Mail list logo