Re: support for merged /usr in Debian
Hello all.
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 01:23:06AM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 05.01.2016 um 01:17 schrieb Adam Borowski:
> > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 08:43:02PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> >> Am 04.01.2016 um 19:12 schrieb Eric Valette:
> >>>> Remember that / and /usr don't have to reside on the same partition with
> >>>> the usrmerge proposal: they only have to be both available
> >>>> post-initramfs. The initramfs already takes care to mount /usr (for the
> >>>> systemd case as initscripts needs updates for sysvinit as was said
> >>>> elsewhere). So no repartitioning should be required on upgrades.
> >>> As explained elsewhere in this thread, using initramfs is still not
> >>> mandatory in debian
> >>
> >> an initramfs is not mandatory as long as you don't have /usr on a
> >> separate partition.
> >> No initramfs + split /usr is not supported and has been broken for a while.
> >
> > I guess you meant "with systemd".
>
> Nice try, but no. Those issues are not specific to systemd.
>
Though systemd might be the only init system where developers are
actually nice enough to actually give you the warning, while in sysvinit
"with a big fat warning added"[1] has only come as far as being
discussed but not yet implemented.
Here's how another sysvinit maintainer summarized the situation[1]:
"/usr as a separate partition *and* no initramfs to mount it early is
[unfortunately] a really bad idea on jessie/sid, [...] (but warning the
user of the problem is likely to be a good idea)."
(Note: this was when jessie was testing and still not frozen.)
Unfortunately I think this is one of the last times the sysvinit
maintainers where heard from....
Ignorance really seems to be bliss. I wonder how long people on
debian-devel can go on pretending like everything is fine with sysvinit
while bullying others into doing the work to keep sysvinit on
life-support via reluctant NMUs. One day you might wake up to find
that those NMUs have stopped....
Regards,
Andreas Henriksson
[1]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=757083
Reply to: