On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 07:07 -0700, JD wrote:
> On 04/12/2011 03:38 AM, Gregory Woodbury wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:59 AM, Rahul Sundaram<metherid(a)gmail.com
>> <mailto:metherid@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On 03/10/2011<tel:03%2F10%2F2011> 10:02 AM, Robert Nichols wrote:
>> > I just noticed that ever since Fedora 11 the Installation Guide
>> > recommends against having a /usr partition separate from the
>> root file
>> > system (though as recently as Fedora 12 the Example Usage still
>> showed a
>> > separate /usr). I've always used a separate /usr kept mounted
>> read-only
>> > except when necessary for updates. I was wondering just what
>> sort of
>> > "boot process becomes more complex" issues I've been
fortunate
>> enough to
>> > avoid, and whether the reasons for that recommendation have become
>> > stronger in more recent releases.
>>
>> Some of the reasons are outlined in
>>
>>
http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken
>>
>> Of course, the typical response is argue that, this shouldn't be the
>> case but that is at this point just wishful thinking.
>>
>>
>> Only wishful if people are unwilling to reconsider past actions and
>> are unwilling
>> to consider the necessary changes. The cause appears lost in
>> Fedora/RedHat only
>> because 1 or 2 "large voices" seem to consider this a
"religious"
>> fight and will
>> not consider doing anything to fix it. The attitude that the
>> Filesystem Hierarchy Standard
>> is outmoded and unnecessary and that modern hardware doesn't need to
>> keep things
>> on separate spindles or take space considerations into account anymore
>> belongs
>> to these "large voices" in this realm and therefore it cannot be
fixed.
>>
>> In actuality, only a few pieces need to be moved, but instead major
>> surgery was applied
>> to move the whole of /usr into / instead of applying a band aid and
>> move a few small
>> pieces around.
> I generally agree.
> My reasons for keeping separate /, /var, and /usr
> has been / is to provide some degree of protection
> from corruption to the file system. If all of these were
> under /, then a corruption in / would make the other
> two also inaccessible. So They indeed ought to be kept
> separate for that reason, to minimize loss.
>
> Cheersm
>
> JD
Separating these file system trees is not more efficient unless the
partitions are on separate hard drives.
Sorry, I said nothing about efficiency.
I merely separate these dirs onto separate
partitions to prevent the corruption of one
of them to affect the accessibility to the others.