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

Re: Stuff from /bin, /sbin, /lib depending on /usr/lib libraries

On Sep 03, Serge <sergemdev@gmail.com> wrote:

> * ability to easily edit content of root partition and put some additional
>   software to mount /usr
Can you show some actual real life examples?

> (much easier than making changes to initramfs)
And anyway, adding programs to the initramfs is as trivial as dropping 
an hook script in /etc/initramfs-tools/, so this is a very weak argument.

> * ability to boot with separate /usr without initramfs (people still use that)
Just because somebody does it it does not mean that it is worth 

> * recover from epic disaster
>   (https://github.com/MrMEEE/bumblebee/commit/a047be85247755cdbe0acce6f1dafc8beb84f2ac)
> * log in locally as root and check/fix things having non-mountable usr
You can do this as well from the initramfs or an on-disk recovery image 
like the one installed by the grml-rescueboot package.

> * larger initramfs adds problems for embedded systems
Please provide some actual data which shows how this would be a problem 
and on which embedded systems.

> * update of binaries in root partition does not update binaries in initramfs
Nothing new here.

> Yes, that's what I'm talking about. It was not solved before, and it's still
> not solved. New initramfs approach solves nothing. It just turns one problem
> into another one, requires additional work and adds slots for new bugs.
You got it backwards: mounting /usr in the initramfs actually fixes the 
problems with a standalone /usr, and the work needed is minimal because 
we can reuse the code which is available to mount /.

> You can't be sure about that. It could be that on some system the stuff needed
> to mount /usr was on /srv partition. And it worked because /srv was put before
> /usr in /etc/fstab. In "historical approach" it works, but not in
> "initramfs approach".
Please show some real world examples of such a configuration.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: