On Fri, 14 Nov 1997 10:24:10 -0200 Otavio Exel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
br) wrote:
> - are symlinks really fast?
Quite, except on NFS. You really should worry about it unless you're
a performance freak.
> - I read somewhere that "500mb for /var and /tmp" is fine;
> what exactly does that mean? two partitions summing up 500mb?
> one 500mb partition and symlinks from /var and /tmp?
This is a lot of space wasted unless you have large spool directories
(news/mail). For a reasonable single-user station, 64MB should be
largely enough on /var. /tmp is left to your choice (16 is a good
number).
> - why is /usr/tmp symlynked to ../var/tmp instead of /var/tmp?
> same applies to /usr/spool; is it important?
Yes, all symlinks should be relative, in case you mount filesystems
across NFS or with a boot disk: let's say you have
/dev/hda1 /
/dev/hda2 /usr
/dev/hda3 /var
Then mounting them from the rescue disk, you would have:
/dev/hda1 /mnt
/dev/hda2 /mnt/usr
/dev/hda3 /mnt/var
And /mnt/usr/tmp would correctly point to /mnt/var/tmp instead of
/var/tmp.
> - what will happen with hard lynks if I "cp -d" from one part to
> another?
They'll get duplicated. -d applies only to symlinks.
If you want to preserve files exactly, you want to use cp -a (or tar, cpio,
etc...).
Phil.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
