Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 15:21:32 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: make install trick Message-ID: <19991007152132.F68920@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <v04205500b420d230e6ff@[195.238.21.204]> References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9910051831180.6368-100000@fw.wintelcom.net> <v04205500b420d230e6ff@[195.238.21.204]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> It was my understanding that it was standard recommended practice > practice pretty much across the board to create the following > separate filesystems: > > / > /tmp (perhaps an mfs, perhaps softupdates, or whatever) > /usr > /var > /var/tmp > /home (or wherever you're going to store user directories) > And that most people also then created a separate filesystem for > /usr/local or /opt, or wherever they're going to store the additional You are entering religion. I despise, HIGHLY DESPISE, all the partitions. I don't care for the fragmentation and PITA when upgrading it leads to. HP and SGI workstations have a single huge /. Why do you need /usr seperate from / when you aren't diskless (or /usr'less)? Look at the historic reasons for this division and see if it still makes sense to you today. (and before someone misreads this, yes, my /home is a seperate partition and my /tmp is MFS) -- -- David (obrien@NUXI.com) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991007152132.F68920>