On 21/11/2018 16:24, Alessandro Selli wrote:
>
> So, you agree then that:
I agree from your point of view for your single specific use case.
Generally I totally disagree, I manage a diskless cluster that depends
on NFS mounted /usr.
It doesn't matter to the cluster nodes that the package manager treats
/bin and/usr/bin co-jointly on the file server host.
e.g. /bin/mount is not version dependant on /usr
Utilities locally under /sbin & /bin are useful on the nodes when
something goes pear shaped and /usr is not available.
>
> 1. A separate /usr serves no practical purpose on a Debian/Devuan system;
> 2. sharing /usr over NFS "is not practical" (no matter it's been done
> for decades);
> 3. "you can't split the package database between separate systems"
> (whatever this means, who needs to split the package database and why?);
> 4. having / and /usr constitute a "managed whole" is the only sensible
> way to go;
> 5. "there is no practical purpose to the separation as in (1) above";
> 6. "the separate filesystems can be treated as a managed collection.
> It's still pointless though";
> 7. following another path other that the systemd/Free(lol!)desktop and
> Debian one "It's simply impractical"?
>
>
> Please let me know, because the answer would have deep practical
> effects to me.
::
Re: [DNG] /usr to merge or not to m…
