lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jul]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Partition Sizing
Zack Weinberg writes:
>
> Richard Gooch writes:
> > Zack Weinberg writes:
> > > In addition, you should symlink /tmp to /var/tmp and audit your rc
> > > scripts to make sure they don't need /tmp before /var is mounted.
> > > All modern distros I've tried get this right.
> >
> > Why not just have /tmp a separate FS?
>
> I don't see any advantage of that over linking /tmp to /var/tmp.
> The only issue with not having /tmp on the root filesystem is if
> it's needed before the rest of the filesystems are mounted, and
> you'd have the same problem with a separate /tmp or a symlink.

OK, fair enough. I had originally read it as "/tmp -> /var/tmp is
better than mount /tmp". I guess you weren't saying that.

I personally prefer a separate /tmp so that dumb users don't
accidentally fill up /var (/var/spool, /var/log and so on).

> > > It would be nice to be able to mount / ro and nosuid, but you can't
> > > do that because there tend to be a few suid executables in /bin, you
> > > frequently need to modify files in /etc, and login/logout needs to
> > > modify permissions on /dev nodes. devfs plus lots of symlinks may
> > > be able to correct this.
> >
> > You don't need any symlinks with the standard devfs configuration
> > (devfs mounted on /dev). What makes you think you do?
>
> Not for /dev - for the frequently modified files in /etc, like
> /etc/shadow (assuming you make people change passwords regularly...)

Ah, OK. Another misunderstanding.

Regards,

Richard....

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.096 / U:0.384 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site