OS ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Saturday 05 Oct 2002 6:24 pm, Peter Ruskin wrote: > > On Saturday 05 Oct 2002 17:37, Bob Walker wrote: > > > On Saturday 05 October 2002 03:46 am, Peter Ruskin wrote: > > > > On Friday 04 Oct 2002 02:43, Dave Seff wrote: > > > > > > > > > Why must /root be on the same file system as / ? > > > > > > > > > > I keep mine separate as not to wipe out ssh keys and other > > > > > things. I can change it after the initial install and all is > > > > > fine, but the installer complains. > > > > > > > > I asked this and Pixel responded by requesting a good reason for > > > > allowing /root to have its own partition. My reason is that it > > > > is root's home and I don't want it wiped when I reinstall. I've > > > > always worked like that. Who decided that it's taboo? > > > > > > > > /root on my 9.0 machine is now on its own partition, just as in > > > > my other unices. I have yet to see a good reason given for > > > > disallowing this on install - to me it's draconian interference. > > > > > > According to Version 2.2 of the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard > > > (FHS), /root is not a requirement - it is optional. However, if > > > the root directory is used, it must be in /. 'root' CAN exist as a > > > link to a directory or as a mounted partition. > > > > There. Thanks Bob. So there is no reason why /root should not be on > > a separate partition - just as I thought. Pixel, can you now change > > the installer to allow this? > > I agree ! I had to install a root directory in / and then copy it to a > partition called /root !!
Well it seems to be a very low priority. I mean you shouldn't use the root account, you should use su/sudo so if you keep that in mind your /root should be rather empty. I think most beginners don't know how to configure their shell so they do what's ``logical'' to them and start customizing the root account. On OpenBSD the default root-shell is csh and a lot of people panic when are confronted with a shell without history and tab-completion so it's a faq where I wrote a document for: http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/documents/change_root_shell.html Most of it applies to any unix. The argument I heard that somebody uses it as a backup: Well you can use another backup-partition and make a dir that is only readable by root. So again I see no clear reason that you _must_ have a /root partition. Not that it shouldn't be possible to have one according to the FHS but it's very low priority to comply with it. But perhaps I am missing something and can you folks present me with a convincing argument that doesn't need multiple exclamationmarks. Groetjes, Han. -- http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/software
