On 11/23/2014 11:46 AM, Gour wrote:
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 11:29:02 -0500 Anton Aylward
wrote: You do not have a separate /boot listed there.
Correct.
I'd be interested in learning why you chose not to have a separate /boot partition.
Because the Linux OS has advanced and there is no longer required to keep separate /boot.
Moreover, I use Debian with such setup for more than one year without any problem:
UUID=xyz / btrfs defaults,noatime,compress=lzo,autodefrag,subvol=@ 0 0 UUID=xyz /home btrfs defaults,noatime,compress=lzo,autodefrag,subvol=@home 0 0
As you can see, there are not so many subvolumes as created by default by Yast, but it works.
For various values of 'works. My background comes from civil and aviation engineering where the premise is that the environment, the use is not benign, that you assume things that can go wrong will go wrong and things that can't go wrong will also go wrong. Some people call this 'belt and braces' engineering :-0 I don't know where you get the idea that a separate /boot is not *required* any longer. It may not be mandatory in many use-cases but it makes life a lot simpler in a lot more. There's a similar argument bout having a separate /tmp or even a /tmp on a separate spindle. The latter is about performance, the former is about security. The bug that the having /tmp on a different FS from the rootFS was fixed, but that's not to say some errant programmer won't recreate it. Even so, it doesn't take an errant programmer to come up with a runaway process that can consume all the scape on /tmp. And if /tmp is NOT on its own FS that means its going to eat all your main FS and that will soon result in a frozen system and for some an unbootable system. While I like the optimizations that a BtrFs-as-the-whole-FS-tree offers in terms of a the optimizations and packing it can achieve, I want a robust, that is robust in the face of perversity and my own stupidity and carelessness, system. Those are among the reasons I think that a separate /boot and separate /tmp make sense. Like Lynn and John I'm not a saint. I'm not on the road for beatification and I make typing mistakes, even when editing config files! Keeping with the mainstream so that the advice the other 'core experts' here give me can be applied makes life easier. That Debian or Redhat have their own way of doing things, have made different decisions in many ways, is their concern. As people have commented, there are things that are not in BtrFs, not in systemd for the openSuse version so as to ensure better stability and reliability. OpenSuse is not as 'bleeding edge'. I like that. I asked why you chose not to have a separate /boot and the answer seems to be "'Cos Debian didn't do it that way". It makes me wonder why you have chosen to move from Debian to openSuse as you seem intent on rebuilding your openSuse system so that it looks like a Debian system. -- /"\ \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML Mail / \ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org