[Mageia-dev] Please test: initscripts+systemd in updates_testing
Johnny A. Solbu
cooker at solbu.net
Wed Nov 2 03:49:02 CET 2011
On Wednesday 02 November 2011 01:05, andre999 wrote:
> No offense intended
None detected. ;-)=
> but you don't see a slight advantage of not having
> to mount a separate partition, and of sharing the space available on the
> otherwise 2 separate partitions, particularly if the disk space is
> somewhat limited ?
If the diskspace is limited, there often is no available space to host a separate /usr.
The old drive in my gateway was a 4G drive. There was One partition. ;-)=
I do see the need to have all in one partition in many cases.
But there is a diffenrece in having a need and require it. :-)=
> Since you have read the reference, you didn't notice that the option of
> separate partitions is _not_ precluded ?
Some of the answers I got here suggested otherwize. if /usr needs to be mounted in order for the system to boot normally. Then have systemd mount it.
I do see that there might be some problems involved in solving it.
> However if one has / and /usr on the same partition, combining /bin,
> /sbin, /usr/bin and /usr/sbin would certainly be a lot simpler than it
> is now.
Yes. I see that, and I see that it can be agood idea to merge /*bin with /usr/*bin
> I never could understand why the complication of separate /bin and /sbin,
I still feel that the daemon's executeable's belongs in sbin rather than bin.
> and never appreciated the gymnastics of different commands with
> the same name to handle root/non-root permissions for certain commands.
I haven't noticed that. do you have an example?
> To me, avoiding unnecessary complication by design is a big plus.
Agreed. But don't throw the baby out with the water. ;-)=
Johnny A. Solbu
PGP key ID: 0xFA687324
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the Mageia-dev