From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1R4U5m-0006E1-8h for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 08:48:15 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E7FC421C1AF; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 08:48:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpq3.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net (smtpq3.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net [212.54.42.166]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4AB921C022 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 08:47:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [212.54.42.150] (helo=smtp18.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net) by smtpq3.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R4U4a-00080G-BW for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:47:00 +0200 Received: from 5ed027a1.cm-7-1a.dynamic.ziggo.nl ([94.208.39.161] helo=data.antarean.org) by smtp18.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R4U3i-0006ix-4G for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:46:06 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D561DDAB for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:46:19 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from data.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (data.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GAjH-ew0BqHg for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:46:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eve.localnet (eve.lan.antarean.org [10.20.13.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DE8B635 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:46:17 +0200 (CEST) From: Joost Roeleveld To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] udev + /usr Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:46:02 +0200 Message-ID: <3897910.vRcKR581gn@eve> User-Agent: KMail/4.7.1 (Linux/2.6.36-gentoo-r5; KDE/4.7.1; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <20110912150248.GB3599@acm.acm> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-ID: 1R4U3i-0006ix-4G X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-SpamCheck: geen spam, SpamAssassin (niet cached, score=-0.692, vereist 5, BAYES_00 -1.90, KHOP_DYNAMIC 0.73, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.98, RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.50) X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-From: joost@antarean.org X-Spam-Status: No X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 5ab4cb4ba459fa87752eaa00ff4d9a13 On Thursday, September 15, 2011 06:44:58 PM Canek Pel=E1ez Vald=E9s wro= te: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Mark Knecht w= rote: > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Mike Edenfield = wrote: > >> On Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:16:03 PM Joost Roeleveld wrote:= > >>> On Thursday, September 15, 2011 04:42:23 PM Mike Edenfield wrote:= > >>> > I would estimate that the vast, vast, vast majority of users ar= e > >>> > those such as myslelf, who have no opinion whatsoever, and > >>> > either will not be affected at all by these changes (because > >>> > they don't separate / and /usr), or will simply apply the > >>> > proposed initramfs solution and move on. > >>>=20 > >>> You also don't have /var (or /var/log) seperated? Or any of the > >>> other parts of the filesystem that might be required by udev-rule= s? > >>=20 > >> Speaking solely for myself, no. Years ago I routinely split /, /us= r, > >> and /var when setting up my FreeBSD systems, and found that it onl= y > >> ever caused problems when I could not get /usr or /var mounted whe= n I > >> needed them. > >>=20 > >> At least since I switched to Gentoo, I've simply set up one partit= ion > >> with everything on it, and kept regular backups in case of failure= . > >>=20 > >> I clearly recognize that there are valid reasons to split your > >> partitions, I have just never found any of them applicable to my > >> situations. > >>=20 > >> --Mike > >=20 > > My first response to this 300+ post thread, and only to say that in= > > something like 15 years of playing with & using Linux I've never sp= lit > > /usr & no longer split /var. I also don't use LVM or anything fancy= > > like that. I just keep backups and use them if there's a failure. L= ife > > is pretty simple. > >=20 > > My suspicion is that by far most casual desktop users of Linux, Gen= too > > based or not, run pretty much this way and will be unaffected by th= is > > whole change and as such have no reason to post. >=20 > Ubuntu recommends /, /home and swap [1]. Fedora recommends /, /boot > and swap [2]. OpenSUSE has several sets, but the "simple" and "dual > booting" recommends /, /boot, /home and swap [3]. Debian says [4]: >=20 > "For new users, personal Debian boxes, home systems, and other > single-user setups, a single / partition (plus swap) is probably the > easiest, simplest way to go. However, this might not be such a good > idea when you have lots of disk capacity, e.g., 20GB or so. Ext2 > partitions tend to perform poorly on file system integrity checking > when they are larger than 6GB or so. >=20 > For multi-user systems or systems with lots of disk, it's best to put= > /usr, /var, /tmp, and /home each on their own partitions separate fro= m > the / partition." >=20 > Interestingly, the Gentoo handbook [5] recommends /, /boot and swap. > Damn, I haven't installed Gentoo in a long time, I hadn't looked at > the handbook in years. >=20 > Anyway, Debian is the only "big" distro recommending separated /usr, > and then only for multiuser setups. It's really years since I've > looked at the recommended partition schemes: when I started using > Linux, a separated /home was almost a must. And we had tiny hard > drives then. Now get out of my lawn. Gentoo still has some guides recommending split /usr: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-x86+raid+lvm2-quickinstall.xml There are several people using this type of layout. The suggested partitioning scheme is usually for beginner installations= . Not=20 necessarily for larger installations with specific requirements. The debian guide talks about 20GB drives. I don't have those anymore. t= he=20 smallest drive I have is a 320GB IDE-drive for the database server in t= he lab. The server has 2 mirrored 500GB drives for the OS, email and websites. = The=20 rest of the data is on drives larger then 1TB. Sticking all these on a single partition is going to take forever to fs= ck and=20 will make maintenance a nightmare. I like the flexibility LVM brings me= . On the gentoo-dev list, I am now hearing that in future, I will need to= use a=20 full initramfs for my usecase. I'm trying to find out if there is a way= to=20 avoid this. Once I find out, I will post the info here. -- Joost > Regards. >=20 > [1] http://www.easy-ubuntu-linux.com/ubuntu-installation-606-7.html > [2] > http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/13/html/Installation_Guide= /s2-di > skpartrecommend-x86.html [3] http://en.opensuse.org/SDB:Partitioning > [4] http://www.debian.org/releases/woody/i386/ch-partitioning.en.html= > [5] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-amd64.xml?full=3D1