From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Aug 13 13:35:07 1995 Return-Path: questions-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id NAA02795 for questions-outgoing; Sun, 13 Aug 1995 13:35:07 -0700 Received: from diamond.sierra.net (diamond.sierra.net [204.94.39.235]) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with SMTP id NAA02789 for ; Sun, 13 Aug 1995 13:35:04 -0700 Received: from martis-d220.sierra.net by diamond.sierra.net with SMTP id AA12800 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Sun, 13 Aug 1995 13:34:58 -0700 Message-Id: <199508132034.AA12800@diamond.sierra.net> From: "Jim Howard" To: Faried Nawaz , freebsd-questions@freefall.FreeBSD.org Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 12:05:37 -0800 Subject: Re: gnumalloc Reply-To: jiho@sierra.net Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail/Windows (v1.22) Sender: questions-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > how did you compile things in /bin and /sbin with shared libraries? is > your /usr/lib in the same partition as / ? or did you do something with > ldconfig and ld.so? i'm curious because i've never tried it, but wanted > to... Gee, clever me, it just sank in on me what the point about partitions was. I installed everything on one partation, because I've only got one drive, and that made sense to me. If the /usr tree were on a separate partition you'd have an impossible time, because init (and several other programs) are running well before a separate /usr partition gets mounted! It's an issue I never faced. I suppose servers ALWAYS have /usr on a separate partition, which makes another reason (in addition to performance) why shared libraries for /bin and /sbin MIGHT not be a good idea for servers. This is yet another example of how in the U*IX world, the desktop user's logic isn't always compatible with the site administrator's logic.