On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 14:56 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 02:43:33PM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
> This despite the FHS says (right at the top of Chapter 3, the Root
> Filesystem):
>
> /usr, /opt, and /var are designed such that they may be located on other
> partitions or filesystems.
>
> Do we *really* want to head this way, ignoring bugs resulting from
> having /usr on a different partition such as
>
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/#626007, which is what led to this?
What's the benefit in having /usr or /opt as separate filesystems?
/opt is a location filled with vendor detritus on a lot of systems -
sometimes managed by rpms, sometimes not. It's not uncommon to have /opt
automounted via nfs. Additionally, on some workstastion systems /opt is
a separate drive managed by the 'local admin' of the machine and filled
with whatever 3rd party software they need for their instance.
/usr is frequently given different mount options (like noatime, for
example) or mounted readonly to prevent unnecessary writes to the
system.
Additionally, since our software in fedora has a trickle down impact on
users in rhel-land I think you'll find that this will have to be done,
eventually for them.
Finally, I'm more than a little concerned by the tone of comments in
that bug report. It's troubling.
-sv