[Feature Suggestion] UsrMove continued

Serge sergemdev at gmail.com
Wed Oct 10 09:39:36 UTC 2012

2012/10/9 Jochen Schmitt wrote:

> I want to disagree with your suggestion. /root is the home directory of
> the superuser and should not be placed on a network device in opposite
> of the home directories of the ordinary users. The user root should be
> able to logon without a network connection to do any rescue work on
> the system.

This argument would work for original UsrMove feature. But it's already
done. Right now user `root` cannot login without /usr being mounted,
because it needs at least bash, which is now /usr/bin/bash. Moving /root
to /usr is just consistent continuation of implemented UsrMove.

> I want to consider, that /etc should be mounted on a writeable partition
> in opposite of /usr to allow changes without remounting.

Probably you're right, but I can't think of any real-world examples where
it would be needed. Can you name some?

My line of reasoning was: if you're managing a set of machines with shared
/usr you always want /etc to be shared too. It's a pain for admin to
install/update some software and then run across all the machines to
set up new /etc files everywhere. And as long as /etc is also shared
among multiple machines it should be read-only as well as /usr. This is
needed at least as a security measure, so you could be sure that some
bug on one machine won't break everything else.

> your test case didn't hit your suggestion of remove the /etc
> directory.

It did. :) Check the following line closely:
# mv -f /root /etc /usr/; ln -s usr/root usr/etc /

It actually does not hit the /tmp case (mount-bind is used instead of
symlink). But that's solely because of systemd becoming extremely
unhappy when /tmp is a symlink.


More information about the devel mailing list