Subject: Re: Why root and usr in separate partitions?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/30/2001 11:31:07
[ On Saturday, June 30, 2001 at 13:04:50 (+0200), Thomas Michael Wanka wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Why root and usr in separate partitions?
> I allways thought that the partioning shemes main
> reason was to keep parts of the disk that have
> frequent write access (like logs) und user write
> access (whereever the users of the system keep
> their apps)in seperate partitions to reduce the
> risk of demaging partitions needed by the system
> in case of problems like power failures and such.
That's part of the recovery issue, but it's not the original reason.
There is no real reason to keep / and /usr separate. /var, yes, /home
too, and maybe /usr/local (/local, /opt, whatever), /usr/pkg, /usr/src,
etc., but not / and /usr. They should both be relatively static. Sure
you can't make / read-only, but I still haven't seen a non-diskless
system where that's true anyway.
These days it's still handy to have a separate / and /usr for diskless
machines, but the original reason was simply because everything wouldn't
fit on one disk! ;-)
Oh, and BTW, /var alone as a separate partition isn't sufficient if
you've got a busy system and not much space. You'll probably want /var,
/var/log, /var/mail, and maybe /var/spool, /var/spool/uucp,
/var/spool/news and so on, depending on what you do with the system.
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>