Hi Jaco,

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 11:18:38AM +0200, Jaco Kroon wrote:
> Hi,

> For what it's worth.  All of my systems are installed with a fixed-size
> 512MB / with everything else (including /usr) on separate LVs.
> Whilst sbin vs bin is just a matter of what's available, to me it makes
> sense to keep these split.  To me it's always been logical to keep
> administrative type (root) tools under sbin, and stuff that's generally
> useful for users under bin.
 As I said in my previous message, sbin and /usr/sbin are supposed to
 have statically linked binaries in them, "s" means static not

> Keeping / and /usr split (or the ability to keep it split) is rather
> crucial for me.  It's for historic installations a matter of space
> constraints on /.  For new installations it's a matter of keeping / as
> small as possible in order to have a smallish bootable system which can
> be used for recovering the rest of the system, ideally without an initrd
> (which also works to an extent).

Having / and /usr on separate filesystems is not what split-usr is
about. split-usr just means that /bin /lib* and /sbin are directories
not symlinks.
 Splitting / and /usr to separate filesystems without an initramfs is
 not officially supported.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to