On 2016-01-01 13:39:35, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 12:23:20PM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > > md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri) writes: > > > Thanks to my conversion program in usrmerge there is no need for a flag > > > day, archive rebuilds or similar complexity and we can even continue to > > > support unmerged systems. > > > > Is there any use case that requires supporting unmerged systems? > > I don't think so. You already need the / filesystem, and with today storage > sizes, if you can hold that, you can hold the whole system, period. Even on > any embedded that can run Debian. > > The last time I've seen a split done due to small / was Maemo ten years ago. > And guess what? They didn't use / vs /usr but hacked something where both / > and /usr were on the small mmc while big /opt hold most of the files, with > symlinks from /usr. That's because their needs were different from those of > Ken Thompson in 1971. > > A reasonable and often important split is keeping /+/usr apart from a box's > main purpose, be it /home, /srv or /var/lib/postgresql -- but in any case > both / and /usr will be on the same filesystem. > > Thus, I'd say /usr is pointless on any machine we can reasonably support. I respectfully disagree. Having / contain basically only /etc means we finally have a full separation between configuration (/), binaries (/usr) and state (/var), which opens up some interesting options in the field of large-scale virtualisation. regards, iustin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature