[systemd-devel] /usr on separate file system

[Kay Sievers]

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 17:14, Dr. Werner Fink <werner at suse.de> wrote:
> 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 ;)

It surely fully does, just like sysv. It just fails the same way as
sysv, and unlike sysv, it does mention the misconfiguration of the
system for todays setups to syslog. Please check what all this is
about before stating anything like missing generic support.

Thanks,
Kay