Subject: Re: Separate /usr, etc...
To: Chuck Yerkes <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <email@example.com>
Date: 12/17/2002 11:40:46
On Monday, 16 December 2002 at 14:43:36 -0800, Chuck Yerkes wrote:
> I've offered this on the embsd list and the soekris-tech list
> Quoting Peter Seebach (firstname.lastname@example.org):
>> I am toying with my old Compaq network appliance again, and I'm thinking of
>> trying to build a "complete" installation which lives on a single CF card.
>> How important is it that /usr be a separate filesystem? I'm a bit strapped
>> for space (I want X installed locally). I can always give up and go back
>> to a netboot kernel, but I think it'd be awfully neat if I could make
>> everything run locally.
> I'm a very strong advocate of making /usr separate because I
> mount it read-only. In fact, except for root, if it's got
> a binary on it, it's RO. If it's got data, it's mounted
> noexec, nosuid, nodev. Several reasons. And I've built machines
> where the binaries are on disks PINNED read-only (trojan that!).
OK, so if root is RO and /usr is RO, what's the necessity for making
them separate file systems?
> But we're talking Compact Flash.
> My soekris boxes have 1 large partition. Mounted read-only.
> I have a /mfs partition that's mounted, er, mfs. It gets filled,
> on boot, with an rsync from /mfs.PROTO/.
> Then I have symlinks.
> /var/run -> /mfs/var/run
> /tmp -> /mfs/tmp
> /var/tmp -> /mfs/var/tmp
> /etc/resolv.conf -> /mfs/etc/resolve.conf (one is a DHCP client)
> and so on.
Right, that was what I was trying to say earlier, but I missed the
point about mfs.
Finger email@example.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers