Russ Allbery wrote: >Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org> writes: >> In all of the recent discussions about separate /usr partitions, most >> people seem to acknowledge them as unusual, special-purpose >> configurations, even those who use them. To the extent they have a use >> at all, they primarily have a use for people who have very specific >> reasons for wanting them, and all of those people will know how to >> handle partitioning. To a lesser extent, that holds true for having >> separate partitions for /var, /tmp, or other top-level directories. It >> seems likely that any such setup will have custom requirements. > > I don't think these things are alike. Separating /var and /tmp from the > rest of the file systems is done because those partitions contain varying > amounts of data and often fill if something goes wrong, but can fill > without impacting the rest of the system and allowing easy recovery if > they're not on the same partition as everything else.
Exactly what I had in mind when I said "To a lesser extent". :) I still think the general statement applies: "It seems likely that any such setup will have custom requirements.". Anyone installing a server probably either wants one of the two other guided setups (all-in-one or separate /home) or wants the manual partitioner because they have specific ideas about which partitions and sizes they want. Thus, I think the guided partitioner shouldn't offer a generic pile-o'-partitions option, and particularly not one with a separate /usr. - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111215234959.GA6782@leaf