From owner-freebsd-questions Sat May 31 13:18:42 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA10493 for questions-outgoing; Sat, 31 May 1997 13:18:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from iceberg.anchorage.net. (root@iceberg.anchorage.net [207.14.72.150]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA10488 for ; Sat, 31 May 1997 13:18:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aak.anchorage.net (ai-131 [207.14.72.131]) by iceberg.anchorage.net. (8.6.11/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA00379; Sat, 31 May 1997 11:15:07 -0800 Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 12:07:54 -0800 (AKDT) From: Steve Howe X-Sender: abc@aak.anchorage.net To: Sinuralan cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: single filesystem? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sat, 31 May 1997, Sinuralan wrote: > Heya, hey! > I was wondering if it was necessary to have three file systems (/, /usr, > /var), which seems to be the default. It seems like it'd be much more > convenient to have them all in one filesystem, and not have to worry about > logfiles/mail/tmp killing the /var section, or any similar occurances. you can do that if you want. but then what if your file system fills because something went wrong and a logfile filled it up ... how would you log in to fix anything? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sleep: a sign a caffeine deprivation ... http://www.anchorage.net/~un_x -------------------------------------------------------------------------