On 04/12/2011 09:17 PM, Jon Elson wrote: > Igor Chudov wrote: >> I used Linux since 1995. I do not personally see the point of having /usr >> mounted separately. >> > The idea, I think, is that the /boot file system, and maybe the /root > file system, also, are nearly static. > A static file system is a lot less likely to get corrupted. If a power > failure, hard drive or memory error, > etc. corrupts the /usr file system, at least you can boot the OS and > start trying to repair the damage. > > I have some systems set up this way. > > Jon
The /boot dir holds the Linux boot images and remains static only as long as you don't upgrade your version of the system. The /root partition only remains static if you don't su or log in as root (that's it's home dir...) If your /usr partition gets corrupted, at least on a linux box, you may not even be able to boot single user, since a lot of the system binaries and libraries live there. Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Forrester Wave Report - Recovery time is now measured in hours and minutes not days. Key insights are discussed in the 2010 Forrester Wave Report as part of an in-depth evaluation of disaster recovery service providers. Forrester found the best-in-class provider in terms of services and vision. Read this report now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/ibm-webcastpromo _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
