[systemd-devel] /usr on separate file system

[Lennart Poettering]

On Thu, 03.03.11 17:39, Pablo Hess (natunobilis at gentoobr.org) wrote:

> 
> >> Would it work better if /usr was an automounted target?
> >
> > That would probably blow up in your face, since a lot of programs used
> > during early boot end up accessing /usr and would stay stuck
> 
> Aren't /usr/bin and /usr/sbin and /usr/lib supposed to house **only**
> binaries and respective libraries that are **not** required for
> boot-up? If so, then the right solution would be to move those
> required binaries to /bin, /sbin.

Well, that's not the status quo. Quite a few programs install udev rules
that refer to binaries, libraries or data file in /usr. And the question
is really whether it's worth moving all those files. I.e. do you really
want the PCI/USB id databse in /lib? I am don't think so.

But really, I feel like I keep repeating myself like a broken
record. Please read up this thread, the LWN thread and the README of
systemd before keeping asking the same questions over and over again. I
do believe everything has already been said on this topic.

> Not supporting a separate /usr would be a major setback for systemd, IMO.

Why? systemd just warns you. systemd itself works fine with sperate
/usr. It's just a statement on the general ecosystem, a statement of
fact on the status quo.

systemd is just the messenger. Don't shoot the messenger.

And even if systemd was actively broken in supporting separate /usr I
fail to see how this would constitue a "major setback"...

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.