Re: / /home on different partitions?
- From: tc-jus@xxxxxxxx (Tobias Crefeld)
- Date: 30 May 2008 19:10:00 +0200
Moe Trin meinte:
So none of the installs you've done start by _offering_ to partition
(which you can ignore) and then making a new file system on those
partitions you've designated? When you make a new file system, anything
on "this" partition is gone, and that includes /usr/local/, /home/,
and anything else physically on the partition.
I decided very early to install ext3 instead of SUSEs long-term default
reiserfs and so the last time I created the root-fs on my desktop system
was after buying the computer 5 years ago (V7.3 ?).
There are some advantages in separating /home if you want to put it on
a transportable disk but as long as you're using the same disk for a
/home- partition I see no advantage.
Assuming a stand-alone system (where /home/$USER is actually on a local
disk rather than a network file system) the main advantage is when you
update to a new version.
Well, I can only speak for me and cannot say which is the "main" advantage
for everyone. Maybe you can.
Wasting disk space just for the rare times you want to destroy file system
because of upgrades doesn't seem very effective for me as there exists a
backup of my users data.
/etc : Host-specific system configuration
Generally, the only thing important or unique there are the
authentication files (/etc/passwd, /etc/group, and the shadow
On most of my systems there exist "some" more configuration data which
took me sometimes days to configure.
It might be a nice idea for people having enough time to repeat
installation procedures just because of a OS upgrade in order to keep
things "clean" but unfortunately I haven't got so much time left and so I
This kind of wiping-upgrade is not very effective. We should leave it
to MS-Win-(l)users. ;)
We've been doing so since before Linux was created. It simplifies the
installation tremenndously, and avoids left-over cruft from N versions
ago. And that includes /usr/local/ because the compiled stuff that may
be there is going to have to be recompiled for the "new" libraries and
similar crap. Updates in place will often run into version
incompatibilities and/or dependencies. Learned that the hard way when we
tried updating Red Hat 2.0 to Red Hat 3.0.3 in 1996 on a limited number
of systems. We wasted a week trying to clean up the mess, before just
wiping and installing from scratch.
Maybe things got better? My first production system was based on RH 5.2
and I never upgraded the distribution - just some applications and the
kernel - so I can't say what happened in ancient times.
Last week I downgraded an laptop with oS 10.3 to 10.2 for some tests
(hardware problem) and afterwards upgraded back to 10.3. No serious
problems beside the fact that 10.2's kernel doesn't support everything
that 10.3 does - somehow obvious to understand. Only some applications
from packman's repo produced conflicts.
- Prev by Date: Re: RC 1 is out
- Next by Date: Re: / /home on different partitions?
- Previous by thread: Re: / /home on different partitions?
- Next by thread: Re: / /home on different partitions?