hike,
>Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:05:20 -0400
>From: hike <mh1272@xxxxxxxxx>
>On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 8:52 AM, mark <m.roth2006@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> hike wrote:
>> > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 3:18 AM, Rubens Gomes <rubens_gomes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > wrote:
>> <snip>
>> > My question is. "Why do you make a separate mount point for /usr?".
>> >
>> > In the old days of UNIX/SunOS, the hard drives were small and we were
>> forced to have separate mount points for /, /var, /usr,
>> /opt, /usr/openwin for
<snip>
>> As I said in the article I published in SysAdmin last year (before it went
>> under) on upgrading Linux, you want that so that when you do an upgrade,
>> you can rename it, then have a new partition for /usr, and let the install
>> format that. That way, a) it's a "clean install", and b) you can fall back with a
>> few renames in single user mode.
>
>You just need space for another filesystem if you want to do what you
>indicate what the article says and do not, necessarily, need to separate
Yup. And given that all of Linux is < 10G for the o/s, in these days of cheap storage, it's not unreasonable. Also, the installs - when you're going up a full release, not just a subrelease, *alL* want to upgrade everything.
<snip>
>By the way, I enjoy how you are always quoting/referring to article. You
>must be quite proud of yourself. Funny though, you never
Well, yeah, I'm happy to have an article for which I was paid for publication: not much, but it's professional. And when it does cover stuff that's related to what we're talking about, why shouldn't I?
tell which issue
>of Sysadmin your ariticle was in!
July 2007. I think the mag went under with the Sept. issue. (Not my fault! <g>)
mark
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
