On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 05:34:23PM -0400 I heard the voice of John Baldwin, and lo! it spake thus: > On Thursday 27 July 2006 16:58, Mike Meyer wrote: > > Right. I typically install / and /usr as distinct files systems > > for just that reason (/ and /usr have different backup & recovery > > strategies and I use dump, so that's why they are two partitions). > > So why does / need to be different from /var, /usr different from > > /usr/X11R6 and /home different from /usr/local? Seriously now - > > what I just described is my typical install. > > In my case I still have /home in /usr/home, but I should start > making it separate in the hope that I could mount /usr read-only > most of the time reducing the time it takes to fsck when I crash my > test machines.
I have / and /usr [sometimes one partition] mounted read-only on many of my systems. I like the peace of mind of KNOWING nothing'll go wonky on 'em on a crash, I like the shorter fsck times, I kinda like knowing there's that extra (very thin, but still extant) layer of protection against a lot of automated attacks... And, darnit, it just feels cleaner. I tend to have separate /var, /tmp, /home, and /usr/local which are kept rw since they have live and constantly-fiddled data on them, but everything else generally ends up ro since I only need to write them at specific discrete times. Out of the 11 partitions (multiple disks) on my workstation, only those 4 are generally rw. -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream. _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
