Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:11:10 +0200 | From | Adrian Bunk <> | Subject | Re: The naming wars continue... |
| |
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Fri, 29 Oct 2004, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > Read-only /usr is required according to the FHS, and at least on Debian > > a read-only /usr works without problems. > > Indeed. And that's what I use. In /etc/apt/apt.conf I have: > > DPkg { > // Auto re-mounting of a readonly /usr > Pre-Invoke {"mount -o remount,rw /usr";}; > Post-Invoke {"mount -o remount,ro /usr";}; > } > > > A bigger problem might be to properly support it in the package manager. > > Yep. Apt knows about it, but dpkg doesn't. And remounting /usr read-only > fails if files are in use.
I was more thinking about the problems like a database upgrade requiring changes to e.g. the system tables of the database handled in the {pre,post}inst scripts. It even becomes more tricky since a postinst script might make changes to both /usr and such required actions.
These issues which require auditing of all packages are the real issue.
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > Geert
cu Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |