On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 00:26:13 +0000 Kevin Chadwick <ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 22:32:24 +0200 > nunojsi...@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva) wrote: > > > My thanks, too! There's nothing like reading on some actual > > experience with this. So this was once the reason to keep / > > separate. Not that important anymore (but this is still no excuse > > to force people to keep /usr in the same filesystem). > > Sorry but real world data is important and I am fully aware of the > academic theorist problems compared to practical experience but this > simply doesn't apply here. I didn't see any evidence or > argument that a larger root conducting millions more writes is as safe > as a smaller read only one perhaos not touched for months. > > The testing criteria were very generally put and just because an > earthquake hasn't hit 200 building in the last 50 years is no reason > to remove shock absorbers or other measures from sky scrapers. > I thought I was clear in that - I was my survey of my machines for my purposes only, not a formal study in any way. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
