Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:59:52 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <dev-null@nuxi.com> To: "Maxim M. Kazachek" <stranger@sberbank.sibnet.ru>, ports@freebsd.org, Richard Coleman <richardcoleman@mindspring.com>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Oliver Eikemeier <eik@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Ports startup scripts in /etc/rc.d (Re: 5.2-BETA and related ports issues) Message-ID: <20031201045952.GB42765@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1031130234018.74465G-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <20031201092813.X355@sbk-gw.sibnet.ru> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1031130234018.74465G-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Nov 30, 2003 at 11:47:24PM -0500, Robert Watson wrote: > On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Maxim M. Kazachek wrote: > > On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Richard Coleman wrote: ..snip.. > For 5.2-CURRENT, I think we should revisit this issue with one of the > following conclusions winning out, and the rest being discarded as > flame-bait: > > (1) Combine / and /usr into a single file system by default, and add > /usr/local/etc/rc.d to the search order, with appropriate hacks to > handle old-style scripts. The devil will be in the bikeshed, but the > implementation is easy, except for the bit where we explain that > NFS-mounted /usr/local won't work too well. I would like to show support for this option. I've been running /usr on the / partition on *all* my FBSD machines for the past 4 years. The reasons for having a separate / and /usr just don't apply today. Disks are large enough to hold both, and UFS(FFS) is stable. Sun and SGI both combine / and /usr on their pre-installed workstation machines.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031201045952.GB42765>