[systemd-devel] /usr on separate file system

[Dr. Werner Fink]

On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 04:50:16PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 16:44, Dr. Werner Fink <werner at suse.de> wrote:
> >
> > Those customers have payed for support including this feature
> > and some of them exactly for this feature.  I'm not going to
> > ignore this hard requirement for snugness.  If it is not possible
> > for systemd to fulfille the LSB spec systemd is not ready for
> > Enterprise products.
> >
> > It has to be possible to fulfill FHS not only in theory but
> > in practice.  That is that if an network interface has to up
> > for the NFS share /usr then systemd should support this.
> 
> The 1000ths time: it has nothing to do with systemd, and it fails
> today already in many setups, also with sysv.

As I'm the maintainer of sysvinit here, I'd like to know which
setup fails.

> >> >> I think this is mostly wishful thinking by some folks who wrote the FHS,
> >> >> and does not describe what really is.
> >> >
> >> > As FHS specs are part of the LSB, all Enterprise prooducts should
> >> > follow the FHS.
> >>
> >> LSB documents practice and can not dictate anything. Most distros do
> >> not care much what's written there.
> >
> > As already told, this is wrong.
> 
> LSB means nothing for many distros, and you can tell it wrong, but it
> will not change anything.

Hmmm ... AFAIK RedHat has not left the Linux Foundation, does this
mean that RedHat will ignore the results of the LSB working group?

> >> We are about to change some of the practice now, and I guess LSB needs
> >> to be updated. :)
> >
> > You may try it.  Now let us see what happens.
> 
> What will happen is that /usr will be on the rootfs. :)

All joking apart, I'd like to see some generic support within
systemd for partitions as specified in FHS ;)


   Werner

-- 
  "Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having
          a peeing section in a swimming pool." -- Edward Burr