From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B8371381F3 for ; Sun, 25 Aug 2013 22:05:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 93CB6E0CAF; Sun, 25 Aug 2013 22:05:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f171.google.com (mail-wi0-f171.google.com [209.85.212.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30D5CE0C8D for ; Sun, 25 Aug 2013 22:05:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f171.google.com with SMTP id hr7so3617230wib.16 for ; Sun, 25 Aug 2013 15:05:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8/GjHk2UXy7JhjN3Crse4GKOOuUPEZFgAs9radZw14g=; b=NSQAhUHtryubQmCxAHtdezCqy4mstSJq2bbv39Lu+8Q0jTplHzuiMlP3e20EvVrfGR 2Ph8zSO0TY7VZ2872JT1JZS4HUpV00KV2D3tARRpMFmft7ofvYMNukrRkLGMGEANuaY+ oAVxtan+gH3PhqsUVV+qcAhBy+Sub/US6C0HFPAPWEuhdvKY5TMLhefvrgBxonCNom3S Jm3LpeATdXySMm4odOXqoQnISt64/N1P7yTWmzsd8K2UPhHWY9K/8qUxnyrdWpWo7F8s 8b7g8U+xPWhP+WpSR7awvfOMeN4006/iIF3GqtXUSL02w+cfBJe9lTzCFFnfBJcIW6+E OGIQ== X-Received: by 10.180.13.83 with SMTP id f19mr5284503wic.54.1377468346848; Sun, 25 Aug 2013 15:05:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.20.0.41] (196-210-126-75.dynamic.isadsl.co.za. [196.210.126.75]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id r6sm13984836wiw.0.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 25 Aug 2013 15:05:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <521A7EE9.8000706@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 00:02:17 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130809 Thunderbird/17.0.8 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Optional /usr merge in Gentoo References: <520A5446.1050001@mail.ru> <520DA782.4050803@sporkbox.us> <520F6333.70301@dmj.nu> <9716EEEB-144F-47AA-A828-FC9A508CE9FA@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> <521090F5.4090305@gmail.com> <521122CB.4010003@libertytrek.org> In-Reply-To: <521122CB.4010003@libertytrek.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 80ff6ade-0bf6-4683-83c0-b1c2bcd9b903 X-Archives-Hash: 8db907ce153fbad76a400341cb807675 On 18/08/2013 21:38, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 2013-08-18 5:16 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: >> While we're on the topic, what's the obsession with having different >> bits of the file hierarchy as different*mount points*? That harks back >> to the days when the only way to have a chunk of fs space be different >> was to have it as a separate physical thing and mount it. Nowadays we >> have something better - ZFS. To me this makes so much more sense. I have >> a large amount of storage called a pool, and set size limits and >> characteristics for various directories without having to deal with >> fixed size volumes. > > Eh? *Who* has ZFS? Certainly not the linux kernel. > FreeBSD You can get ZFS on Linux with relative ease, you just have to build it yourself. Distros feel they can't redistribute that code. The bit you quoted shouldn't be read to mean that we have ZFS, it works on Linux and everyone should activate it and use it and chuck ext* out the window. I meant that we've been chugging along since 1982 or so with ancient disk concepts that come mostly from MS_DOS and limited by that hardware of that day. And here we are in 2013 *still* fiddling with partition tables, fixed file systems, fixed mountpoints and we still bang our heads weekly because sda3 has proven to be too small, and it's a *huge* mission to change it. Yes, LVM has made this sooooo much easier (kudos to Sistina for that) but I believe the entire approach is wrong. The ZFS approach is better - here's the storage, now do with it what I want but don't employ arbitrary fixed limits and structures to do it. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com