Rich Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Dalerdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
From a users perspective. Could it not be possible to have some USE flag,
or other setting, that would tell portage that a separate /usr partition is
being used then have the needed files placed elsewhere
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:04 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
I understand that Fedora is wanting to do this. What I don't understand is
why. It seems it is udev that is wrecking this havoc.
Well, the answer is a bit more nuanced.
First, keep in mind that in a typical linux distro the
Historically those DIRs contained all utils/tools to manage the system
and fix problems etc. when you are unable to get /usr up, i.e. when it's
remote. The rootfs basically contained all the core system-tools minus
all the apps, which usually were managed centrally.
With bbox of course one could
On 08/04/2011 05:30 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 10:27:27 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from initramfs on top
of / before init is and has been broken with udev for a long time
now[1][2][3]
[1]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 04-08-2011 07:55, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 08/04/2011 05:30 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 10:27:27 +0300
snip
So, let's sum up a little.
The most common argument against separate /usr requiring a proper
initramfs is 'it
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
Again, not all of us are willing to migrate away from a separate /usr
partition, least of all when that is being imposed by some people
trying to shove their pet projects to others and when we don't agree
with or acknowledge the arguments.
+1
From a
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
From a users perspective. Could it not be possible to have some USE flag,
or other setting, that would tell portage that a separate /usr partition is
being used then have the needed files placed elsewhere on / ? I'm not a dev
On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 06:49:36AM -0500, Dale wrote:
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
Again, not all of us are willing to migrate away from a separate /usr
partition, least of all when that is being imposed by some people
trying to shove their pet projects to others and when we don't
Looks like the Linux Foundation has a;
quote
Call for Participation
The LSB workgroup is preparing FHS 3.0, which will be the first FHS
release since 2004. As part of that release, we are soliciting
contributions from all interested parties.
/quote
On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 09:31:07AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
Add another to the list of folks who disagree with this and with the
approach being taken.
I don't blame gentoo devs per se, but I do feel like this is being
forced down everyone's throats without any regard to the *nix
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 10:42 AM, David Abbott dabb...@gentoo.org wrote:
The LSB workgroup is preparing FHS 3.0, which will be the first FHS
release since 2004. As part of that release, we are soliciting
contributions from all interested parties.
More interesting was this thread on their
On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 09:31:07AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 06:49:36AM -0500, Dale wrote:
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
Again, not all of us are willing to migrate away from a separate /usr
partition, least of all when that is being imposed by some people
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Greg KH gre...@gentoo.org wrote:
Also, again, this is an upstream issue, based on the packages you have
installed, not anything that has changed in the distro itself. Upstream
is also working to resolve the issue already, by mounting /usr from the
initramfs,
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 10:27:27 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from initramfs on top
of / before init is and has been broken with udev for a long time
now[1][2][3]
[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364235
[2]
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:28:54 +0200
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn chith...@gentoo.org wrote:
Samuli Suominen schrieb:
Someone mentioned NFS mount on /usr. Do we have other reasons? How
many users that might be?
If you have / encrypted, then you can leave /usr unencrypted as it
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 4:02 AM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
BTW doesn't encrypting rootfs require initramfs anyway?
Yup.
On a side note. I've been experimenting with Dracut+LVM+RAID5 and
have found that it actually works pretty transparently. Now, I
haven't tried it with /usr not
On 07/31/2011 02:22 PM, Kacper Kowalik wrote:
W dniu 30.07.2011 15:55, Samuli Suominen pisze:
On 07/30/2011 01:46 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 10:27:27 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from initramfs on top
of
On 07/31/2011 05:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:55:23 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
I dislike the IUSE=+static some packages are currently doing to
workaround this, instead of moving the needed shared libs to /
I dislike the idea of pciutils and
Samuli Suominen schrieb:
that's my impression now too since nobody has managed to provide useful
case for separate /usr, or they have been very vague like adding 1+1 on
/ and /usr filesystem sizes and counting the risk of corrupted
filesystem from that (one word: backup)
Maybe I have to
On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 10:23:07 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
this is starting to look good:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove#Move_all_to_.2Fusr
Honestly, that seems like a poor draft to me. First of all, I don't see
a reason to move /sbin to /usr/bin instead
On 08/01/2011 10:45 AM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
Samuli Suominen schrieb:
that's my impression now too since nobody has managed to provide useful
case for separate /usr, or they have been very vague like adding 1+1 on
/ and /usr filesystem sizes and counting the risk of corrupted
Samuli Suominen schrieb:
should think this inverse; make separate partitions for the data
directories such as /home or /var
have /usr on /
so when / goes down, you still keep your data
Putting /home and /var on separate partitions can increase isolation
even further, that is true.
On desktop
On 2011-08-01 10:23 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
that's my impression now too since nobody has managed to provide useful
case for separate /usr, or they have been very vague
I will switch if I have to but saying / and /usr on the same filesystem
is the better technical solution just annoys me.
I
On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 10:22:02 +0200
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn chith...@gentoo.org wrote:
Samuli Suominen schrieb:
should think this inverse; make separate partitions for the data
directories such as /home or /var
have /usr on /
so when / goes down, you still keep your data
Putting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 01-08-2011 08:31, Eray Aslan wrote:
On 2011-08-01 10:23 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
that's my impression now too since nobody has managed to provide
useful case for separate /usr, or they have been very vague
I will switch if I have to but
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 01-08-2011 08:31, Eray Aslan wrote:
On 2011-08-01 10:23 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
that's my impression now too since nobody has managed to provide
useful case for separate /usr, or they have been
On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 05:58:49 -0500
Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
I thought Gentoo was about choices? It seems one choice is being
removed or is it?
Gentoo might be, but Fedora isn't. This is a decision that was made by
one Fedora developer.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description:
* Samuli Suominen schrieb am 01.08.11 um 09:23 Uhr:
On 07/31/2011 05:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:55:23 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
I dislike the IUSE=+static some packages are currently doing to
workaround this, instead of moving the needed
El lun, 01-08-2011 a las 13:12 +0200, Marc Schiffbauer escribió:
[...]
* /usr/portage can get very huge and is often written to. With
/ and /usr being on the same FS you really want to have
/usr/portage on a seperate FS then
I am sure there are some other reasons too.
Just my 2¢
* Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto schrieb am 01.08.11 um 11:19 Uhr:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 01-08-2011 08:31, Eray Aslan wrote:
On 2011-08-01 10:23 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
that's my impression now too since nobody has managed to provide
useful case for separate
* Pacho Ramos schrieb am 01.08.11 um 13:19 Uhr:
El lun, 01-08-2011 a las 13:12 +0200, Marc Schiffbauer escribió:
[...]
* /usr/portage can get very huge and is often written to. With
/ and /usr being on the same FS you really want to have
/usr/portage on a seperate FS then
I am
W dniu 01.08.2011 13:12, Marc Schiffbauer pisze:
* Samuli Suominen schrieb am 01.08.11 um 09:23 Uhr:
On 07/31/2011 05:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:55:23 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
I dislike the IUSE=+static some packages are currently doing to
El lun, 01-08-2011 a las 13:30 +0200, Marc Schiffbauer escribió:
* Pacho Ramos schrieb am 01.08.11 um 13:19 Uhr:
El lun, 01-08-2011 a las 13:12 +0200, Marc Schiffbauer escribió:
[...]
* /usr/portage can get very huge and is often written to. With
/ and /usr being on the same FS you
* Kacper Kowalik schrieb am 01.08.11 um 13:32 Uhr:
I'm responding to this particular mail cause it's last in queue and
because it replicates things already mentioned before.
I am a zeleous follower of having seperate /usr partition, thus seeing
moot arguments that goes in favour of my case
On 08/01/2011 02:32 PM, Kacper Kowalik wrote:
W dniu 01.08.2011 13:12, Marc Schiffbauer pisze:
* Samuli Suominen schrieb am 01.08.11 um 09:23 Uhr:
On 07/31/2011 05:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:55:23 +0300
[ .. ]
I am a zeleous follower of having seperate /usr partition,
On 08/01/2011 03:25 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 08/01/2011 02:32 PM, Kacper Kowalik wrote:
W dniu 01.08.2011 13:12, Marc Schiffbauer pisze:
* Samuli Suominen schrieb am 01.08.11 um 09:23 Uhr:
On 07/31/2011 05:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:55:23 +0300
[ .. ]
I am a
On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 15:45:26 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
There is no way to reliably bring up a modern system with an empty
/usr, there are two alternatives to fix it: copy /usr back to the
rootfs or use an initramfs which can hide the split-off from the
system.
To be
* Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto schrieb am 01.08.11 um 11:19 Uhr:
I agree with Eray. Furthermore, please stop trying to reverse the
game. It's those that want to break existing policies and conventions
that have to justify why they want to do that, not those that want to
keep using what has
On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:10:27 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
This isn't about systemd, but indeed it will solve one compability
obstacle for them too. No harm there.
Right, it's about the Gnome operating system, of which systemd is but
one strongly coupled part.
--
Ciaran
On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:10:27 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
* Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto schrieb am 01.08.11 um 11:19 Uhr:
I agree with Eray. Furthermore, please stop trying to reverse the
game. It's those that want to break existing policies and
conventions that have to
On Mon, 1 Aug 2011 13:30:37 +0200
Marc Schiffbauer msch...@gentoo.org wrote:
* Pacho Ramos schrieb am 01.08.11 um 13:19 Uhr:
Having /usr/portage on a different partition will still be
supported if I understood correctly (at least, it still works fine
for me even having the rest of /usr
On 08/01/2011 07:10 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
* Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto schrieb am 01.08.11 um 11:19 Uhr:
I agree with Eray. Furthermore, please stop trying to reverse the
game. It's those that want to break existing policies and conventions
that have to justify why they want to do that,
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 12:55:02PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
On 08/01/2011 07:10 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
* Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto schrieb am 01.08.11 um 11:19 Uhr:
I agree with Eray. Furthermore, please stop trying to reverse the
game. It's those that want to break existing policies
Le 31/07/11 à 04:40, Samuli a tapoté :
If there's any option that allows the use of a separate /usr
partition without an initramfs, then let's explore it. I don't feel
like having to use an initramfs just because I want a small /
without /usr on it.
The message is really missing all the
On 07/31/2011 10:20 AM, netfab wrote:
Le 31/07/11 à 04:40, Samuli a tapoté :
If there's any option that allows the use of a separate /usr
partition without an initramfs, then let's explore it. I don't feel
like having to use an initramfs just because I want a small /
without /usr on it.
The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 04:40:33 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Can we discuss both options?
If there's any option that allows the use of a separate /usr
partition without an initramfs, then let's explore it. I don't feel
like
Le 31/07/11 à 11:15, Samuli a tapoté :
System reactivity. I have an old setup with multiple partitions on
multiple hard-drives mounted on multiple system directories.
And why is both using an initramfs [...] an problem?
No problem for me. If I have to do it, I will. In fact I already use
On 07/31/2011 04:56 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 04:40:33AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 07/31/2011 03:59 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
On 30-07-2011 22:17, William Hubbs wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:27:27AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Since running
W dniu 30.07.2011 15:55, Samuli Suominen pisze:
On 07/30/2011 01:46 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 10:27:27 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from initramfs on top
of / before init is and has been broken with udev
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:55:23 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
I dislike the IUSE=+static some packages are currently doing to
workaround this, instead of moving the needed shared libs to /
I dislike the idea of pciutils and usbutils database(s) in
non-standard location in /
On 30 July 2011 08:27, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from initramfs on top of
/ before init is and has been broken with udev for a long time now[1][2][3]
[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364235
[2]
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 3:27 AM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from initramfs on top of
/ before init is and has been broken with udev for a long time now[1][2][3]
[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364235
[2]
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 10:27:27 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from initramfs on top
of / before init is and has been broken with udev for a long time
now[1][2][3]
[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364235
[2]
On 07/30/2011 01:46 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 10:27:27 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from initramfs on top
of / before init is and has been broken with udev for a long time
now[1][2][3]
[1]
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Someone mentioned NFS mount on /usr. Do we have other reasons? How
many users that might be?
I dislike the documentation not being clear on separate /usr, that it
should only be used if you *really* need it due to
Samuli Suominen schrieb:
Someone mentioned NFS mount on /usr. Do we have other reasons? How
many users that might be?
If you have / encrypted, then you can leave /usr unencrypted as it
contains no secrets. Also /usr can remain mounted read-only most of the
time, so there is a reduced chance
On 07/30/2011 05:28 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
Samuli Suominen schrieb:
Someone mentioned NFS mount on /usr. Do we have other reasons? How
many users that might be?
If you have / encrypted, then you can leave /usr unencrypted as it
contains no secrets. Also /usr can remain
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
11:39 @aidecoe dracut has module fstab-sys. You might check this out
to mount additional stuff before switching to root.
If we want to make /usr required on boot we should build this
capability into genkernel. Or, we
Excerpts from Rich Freeman's message of 2011-07-30 17:10:14 +0200:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Samuli Suominen
ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
11:39 @aidecoe dracut has module fstab-sys. You might check this
out to mount additional stuff before switching to root.
If we want to make /usr
On Saturday 30 July 2011 14:55:23 Samuli Suominen wrote:
Someone mentioned NFS mount on /usr. Do we have other reasons? How
many users that might be?
From /etc/conf.d/fsck, seems like a reason to keep the / FS as small as
possible to reduce the amount of time spent waiting during boot:
#
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 1:20 PM, David Leverton
levert...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Saturday 30 July 2011 14:55:23 Samuli Suominen wrote:
Someone mentioned NFS mount on /usr. Do we have other reasons? How
many users that might be?
From /etc/conf.d/fsck, seems like a reason to keep the / FS
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 13:38:55 -0400
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
From /etc/conf.d/fsck, seems like a reason to keep the / FS as
small as possible to reduce the amount of time spent waiting during
boot:
Well, that only really has a benefit if the system can do something
useful
On Saturday 30 July 2011 18:38:55 Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 1:20 PM, David Leverton
From /etc/conf.d/fsck, seems like a reason to keep the / FS as small as
possible to reduce the amount of time spent waiting during boot:
Well, that only really has a benefit if the system
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:28:54 +0200
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn chith...@gentoo.org wrote:
Samuli Suominen schrieb:
Someone mentioned NFS mount on /usr. Do we have other reasons? How
many users that might be?
If you have / encrypted, then you can leave /usr unencrypted as it
Certainly a good point - you don't want to spoil a SSD-RAID-set's
performance by encrypting /usr but there is surely a strong need to
encrypt /etc and thus /, which has a rather neglectable impact on
performance of a system.
I'd even say that in a lot of environments splitting / and /usr is more
Michał Górny schrieb:
If you have / encrypted, then you can leave /usr unencrypted as it
contains no secrets.
That's doing things upside-down. You should encrypt the data needing
encryption, not the other way. This usually means /home which is
separate more often than /usr.
That is
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:27:27AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from initramfs on top of
/ before init is and has been broken with udev for a long time now[1][2][3]
[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364235
[2]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 30-07-2011 22:17, William Hubbs wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:27:27AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from initramfs on
top of / before init is and has been broken with udev for a long
time
On 07/31/2011 03:59 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
On 30-07-2011 22:17, William Hubbs wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:27:27AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from initramfs on
top of / before init is and has been broken with udev for a
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 04:40:33AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 07/31/2011 03:59 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
On 30-07-2011 22:17, William Hubbs wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:27:27AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Since running separate /usr without mounting it from
70 matches
Mail list logo
