[Grml] alien /usr volume and grml

[T o n g]

Hi,

I remember long time ago there will be problem having /usr volume in a
separated partition -- back to RedHat 6.0 days, when the system would not
boot.

I guess there won't be any problem any more nowadays, but just want to be
sure, and know what factors should be considered when making the move.
E.g., the last 2 parameters in /etc/fstab (dump & proc) should be 0 0,
correct?

How about if I make /usr a symlink to a folder on another volume? E.g.,
will normal package installation/removal be ok with a symlinked /usr?

Thanks for the comments.

[Darshaka Pathirana]

Hi!

Post by T o n g
I guess there won't be any problem any more nowadays, but just want to be
sure, and know what factors should be considered when making the move.
E.g., the last 2 parameters in /etc/fstab (dump & proc) should be 0 0,
correct?

There should be absolutely no problem by putting /usr on a
seperate partition or LV.

My /usr-line looks like this:

/dev/mapper/nautilus.usr /usr ext3 relatime 0 2

And quoting "man fstab":

,----
| The sixth field, (fs_passno), is used by the fsck(8) program to deter?
| mine the order in which filesystem checks are done at reboot time. The
| root filesystem should be specified with a fs_passno of 1, and other
| filesystems should have a fs_passno of 2. Filesystems within a drive
| will be checked sequentially, but filesystems on different drives will
| be checked at the same time to utilize parallelism available in the
| hardware. If the sixth field is not present or zero, a value of zero
| is returned and fsck will assume that the filesystem does not need to
| be checked.
`----

Post by T o n g
How about if I make /usr a symlink to a folder on another volume? E.g.,
will normal package installation/removal be ok with a symlinked /usr?

Should work but I would recommend putting /usr in a seperate
partition/LV.

Greetings,
- Darsha

[T o n g]

Hi,

I remember long time ago there will be problem having /usr volume in a
separated partition -- back to RedHat 6.0 days, when the system would not
boot.

I guess there won't be any problem any more nowadays, but just want to be
sure, and know what factors should be considered when making the move.
E.g., the last 2 parameters in /etc/fstab (dump & proc) should be 0 0,
correct?

How about if I make /usr a symlink to a folder on another volume? E.g.,
will normal package installation/removal be ok with a symlinked /usr?

Thanks for the comments.

[Darshaka Pathirana]

Hi!

Post by T o n g
I guess there won't be any problem any more nowadays, but just want to be
sure, and know what factors should be considered when making the move.
E.g., the last 2 parameters in /etc/fstab (dump & proc) should be 0 0,
correct?

There should be absolutely no problem by putting /usr on a
seperate partition or LV.

My /usr-line looks like this:

/dev/mapper/nautilus.usr /usr ext3 relatime 0 2

And quoting "man fstab":

,----
| The sixth field, (fs_passno), is used by the fsck(8) program to deter?
| mine the order in which filesystem checks are done at reboot time. The
| root filesystem should be specified with a fs_passno of 1, and other
| filesystems should have a fs_passno of 2. Filesystems within a drive
| will be checked sequentially, but filesystems on different drives will
| be checked at the same time to utilize parallelism available in the
| hardware. If the sixth field is not present or zero, a value of zero
| is returned and fsck will assume that the filesystem does not need to
| be checked.
`----

Post by T o n g
How about if I make /usr a symlink to a folder on another volume? E.g.,
will normal package installation/removal be ok with a symlinked /usr?

Should work but I would recommend putting /usr in a seperate
partition/LV.

Greetings,
- Darsha

[T o n g]

Hi,

I remember long time ago there will be problem having /usr volume in a
separated partition -- back to RedHat 6.0 days, when the system would not
boot.

I guess there won't be any problem any more nowadays, but just want to be
sure, and know what factors should be considered when making the move.
E.g., the last 2 parameters in /etc/fstab (dump & proc) should be 0 0,
correct?

How about if I make /usr a symlink to a folder on another volume? E.g.,
will normal package installation/removal be ok with a symlinked /usr?

Thanks for the comments.

[Darshaka Pathirana]

Hi!

Post by T o n g
I guess there won't be any problem any more nowadays, but just want to be
sure, and know what factors should be considered when making the move.
E.g., the last 2 parameters in /etc/fstab (dump & proc) should be 0 0,
correct?

There should be absolutely no problem by putting /usr on a
seperate partition or LV.

My /usr-line looks like this:

/dev/mapper/nautilus.usr /usr ext3 relatime 0 2

And quoting "man fstab":

,----
| The sixth field, (fs_passno), is used by the fsck(8) program to deter?
| mine the order in which filesystem checks are done at reboot time. The
| root filesystem should be specified with a fs_passno of 1, and other
| filesystems should have a fs_passno of 2. Filesystems within a drive
| will be checked sequentially, but filesystems on different drives will
| be checked at the same time to utilize parallelism available in the
| hardware. If the sixth field is not present or zero, a value of zero
| is returned and fsck will assume that the filesystem does not need to
| be checked.
`----

Post by T o n g
How about if I make /usr a symlink to a folder on another volume? E.g.,
will normal package installation/removal be ok with a symlinked /usr?

Should work but I would recommend putting /usr in a seperate
partition/LV.

Greetings,
- Darsha