On Monday 31 October 2011 18:17, Michael Scherer wrote: > > So why merge / and /usr and kill a usable feature?
> What is the usable feature ? I can ask you the same thing: What is the usable feature of merging the two? What benefit do I get as a result? One reson to have a separate /usr is terminal servers which mounts /usr and what not from a sentral server. (e.g. LTSP, Debian-Edu, Skolelinux) If something in /usr is resulting in the need for manual fsck, you have a healthy root file system to work from. If something goes wrong with the root file system, you have a lot less chance of fixing something without having to result to a boot CD/usb-stick. I've been using GNU/Linux for some 10 years now. One of the first things I learned was the value of having /usr on a separate partition. Even on desktop systems I have /, /home, /usr, /var, and /tmp. And there are many users who do this. I don't know anyone who doesn't have /usr on a separate partition. All of my friends who use GNU/Linux does this. Every single one. Having something which forces the merging of / and /usr into a big / will Break many systems on an upgrade. And, why should the system even have to care about if I have /usr on a separate partition? -- Johnny A. Solbu PGP key ID: 0xFA687324
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
