rawhide report: 20101019 changes

[Matthew Garrett]

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 09:24:10AM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:

> A smaller / that is written to less often is less susceptible to errors.
> If you don't allocate enough space for / up front, you can move /usr and
> /opt to separate filesystems later.  /opt can be completely
> unpredictable in space usage, due to vendor RPMs dumping stuff in /opt
> (see Dell's OMSA, that puts everything, including logs, under /opt).

So, LVM?

> I personally don't use a separate /usr on desktops, only on servers.  On
> my servers, /usr is mounted read-only, as an extra protection against
> accidental (or even intentional) screw-ups.  It also means that I don't
> waste I/O cycles on updating atimes on often-used binaries and libraries
> (which of course could also be done with noatime).

mount --bind /usr /usr
mount -o ro,remount /usr

> I've seen some boot-from-flash setups with /usr on a hard drive.

The rational thing there is for the flash to be /boot, not /.

> Basically, if Fedora is going to follow the FHS at all, bugs like 626007
> should be fixed, not ignored because somebody doesn't like a separate
> /usr.

I don't think we gain anything from following the FHS on this point 
other than the ability to have /usr as a separate partition, and think 
that's a pretty circular argument.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org