Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 21 Dec 2000 21:48:47 -0600
From:      Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com>
To:        Peter Brock <peer@interquad.net>
Cc:        FreeBSD-Questions <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: Root Partitions
Message-ID:  <20001221214846.B20035@dan.emsphone.com>
In-Reply-To: <007d01c06bc8$1da110e0$0600a8c0@Home>; from "Peter Brock" on Thu Dec 21 22:34:38 GMT 2000
References:  <007d01c06bc8$1da110e0$0600a8c0@Home>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Dec 21), Peter Brock said:
> Alright i wanna spark a debate.. Can someone tell me why it is
> recomended to devided your hd into seperate slices for / /usr and
> /var? Why not put everything on a single partition and be done with
> it? I have a few setups with just a root partition and everything is
> working great. I also find making backups to other media ie. cloaning
> hds easier with this setup then subdividing your disk into slices.
> Can someone shed some light unto why it is recomemded to partition
> off the disk?

The reasons I've usually seen are:

1) To guarantee that the kernel (which lives in /) is under the
1024-cylinder BIOS boot limit.  I don't think our loader has this
problem anymore, though.

2) To keep a full /usr from also filling up /var, where logfiles and
other important files live.  For a personal box, this isn't much of a
problem.

3) To make sure that if /usr gets damaged, you've at least got a
minimal system in /.  I may not be remembering this right, since it
doesn't make much sense.  Modern disks have sector sparing and
early-warning notification so you know when the media's going bad, and
FFS had been stable for a long time.
 
-- 
	Dan Nelson
	dnelson@emsphone.com


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001221214846.B20035>