[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

/ vs. /usr vs. udev(7)

>>>>> Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> writes:


 > And then there is the big argument in favour of it: booting without
 > /usr is becoming more and more difficult.  The two current solutions
 > for this adopted by udev and the related tools are both suboptimal:
 > waiting in a loop for /usr to appear can fail due to the timeout (and
 > I wonder when we will hit the first deadlock), and moving even more
 > stuff from /usr to / can work only up to a point.

	I don't seem to understand why is this supposed to change as we
	shuffle the things around.  The problem is that we currently are
	starting udev from /, which is mounted from initramfs.  Should
	we move, we'd have to mount /usr from initramfs instead.

	Now, if we're to keep udev starting /before/ /usr is mounted,
	we'd have to start udev from initramfs.

	OTOH, if this order isn't to be kept, why not just simply allow
	udev to be started after /usr is mounted, while retaining /
	vs. /usr distinction we currently use?

FSF associate member #7257

Reply to: