Re: Can a (second) hard disc consist of only 1 extended/logical partition? Or is at least one primary necessary?
- From: Michael Black <et472@xxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:21:04 -0400
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Lew Pitcher wrote:
In comp.os.linux.hardware, s. keeling wrote:I don't even mount /boot unless I have to make changes to it. I suppose
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.hardware.]
Andrew Gideon <c172driver1@xxxxxxxxxx>:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 03:31:41 +0200, Aragorn wrote:
hierarchy tree. For instance, you best split off */var* and */home*
from the root filesystem, and have */tmp* exist on a /tmpfs./
The style I like is to have one partition for /boot
Why? What's that get you if /sbin is unreadable?
Why would you think that the only dependancy is on the readability of /sbin?
A separate /boot partition
- can be used with older machines where there is a BIOS limit to the
location of the OS
- can be mounted as read/only while the rest of the filesystem tree is r/w
- can be backed up to a duplicate partition for recovery (alternate boot)
purposes
- can be stored as an ext2 (or minix, or vfat or ...) filesystem while the
rest of the filesystem tree is some other fs (like ext3 or reiserfs)
you'll now give me a good reason why that's bad, but by definition /boot
is only needed at boot time, and once you set up the bootloader so it
knows where the actual kernel is, I can't see any reason why it needs
to be mounted unless you are actually making changes to it.
Michael
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Can a (second) hard disc consist of only 1 extended/logical partition? Or is at least one primary necessary?
- Next by Date: Re: CD player replacement
- Previous by thread: Re: Can a (second) hard disc consist of only 1 extended/logical partition? Or is at least one primary necessary?
- Next by thread: Re: Can a (second) hard disc consist of only 1 extended/logical partition? Or is at least one primary necessary?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|