Re: Read-only /usr
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 01:19:50AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 10:16:11PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > This can also free up a significant amount of memory by allowing each shared
> > library to be mapped only once, instead of twice (old and new versions).
>
> The point isn't that everybody should be using a readonly /usr. The
> point is that some people would like to, they should be expected to be
> aware of the advantages and disadvantages, and their configuration
> supported by the packaging system if possible.
>
> This is not a proposal to force all Debian users to have a readonly
> /usr. Yeesh. It's a feature request on the part of a minority of users
> who do.
I didn't suggest that there was anything wrong with having a read-only /usr.
In fact, I agree that this should be a supported (and usable) configuration
for Debian systems. I commented on one of the benefits of restarting
certain subsystems after upgrading them, which is present regardless of how
/usr is mounted.
I leave /usr read-write on this particular workstation, since I very
frequently install and upgrade software from unstable. Even so, I sometimes
restart X in order to free up the old shared library maps.
--
- mdz
Reply to: