The case for the /usr merge
Posted Jan 27, 2012 0:40 UTC (Fri) by rickmoen
In reply to: The case for the /usr merge
Parent article: The case for the /usr merge
The purpose of having /bin and /sbin for /usr repairing relied on _two_ working filesystems ( / and /boot).
1. That's only if you're still keeping a separate /boot filesystem, for starters. (Why in 2012, by the way? The 1024-logical-cylinder limit on x86 went away ages ago.)
2. Even that aside, it's highly likely that two deliberately small, seldom modified filesystems will be available even if much-vaster, far more dynamic /usr cannot be mounted and must be repaired.
The role of the rescue system can easily be fulfilled by a rescue initramfs.
Yeah, thanks loads, Lennart. So, every time I have to maintain fsck, filesystem-diagnostic, backup/restore, etc. contents that would normally be in /bin, I have to rebuild an initramfs filesystem image. Swell.
For Pete's sake, stop trying to help, Lennart.
(I remember he's been on this kick for a while with other justifications such as, paraphrasing, 'Binaries in /bin are often not even statically linked, or at least depend on libs inside /usr/lib.' Well, fix that, then.)
to post comments)