Once upon a time, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> said: > OK, this is something I've been meaning to ask about - who > still uses network /usr, and why do you use that instead of > network / ? I don't currently use network /usr, but I typically have /usr on a separate fs from / (at least on servers). I then can mount /usr read-only which means: - no writes - less chance of an "oops" (either due to kernel fs error or user admin error) - in the case someone does break into the system somehow, less chance of them doing anything meaningful (since they'd have to know to remount /usr read-write) - / is smaller - less to go wrong/get screwed up that would keep the system from at least booting in emergency mode Network / would only be useful between identical systems using DHCP, since /etc contains users/passwords, network config, hardware config, etc., unless you want to make /etc a separate fs (which has the same problems as trying to mount /usr from initrd). Other problems with /usr being mounted from initrd are handling fsck, /usr on different device from / that requires additional init, etc. Look at what happens in rc.sysinit before other filesystems are mounted. -- Chris Adams <cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx> Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
