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 -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
