You wrote: > try to outline the output of /etc/fstab, disklabel and df on a table: > > ----------------------------------------- > Mounted on Type Size bsize fsize > - ---------- ---- ------ ----- ----- > a / ffs 64 MB 16384 2048 > b swap swap 512 MB N/A N/A > c <all the disk> > d /altroot ffs 64 MB 16384 2048 > e /var ffs 25 MB 16384 2048 > f /usr ffs 768 MB 16384 2048 > g /var/log ffs 16 MB 16384 2048 > h /var/mail ffs 128 MB 16384 2048 > /var/run mfs 4 MB > i /var/tmp ffs 24 MB 16384 2048 > j /var/www ffs 32 MB 16384 2048 > k /usr/X11R6 ffs 256 MB 16384 2048 > l /usr/local ffs 2048 MB 16384 2048 > m /usr/obj ffs 896 MB 16384 2048 > n /usr/ports ffs 512 MB 4096 512 > o /usr/src ffs 1024 MB 8192 1024 > p /home ffs + MB 16384 2048 > /tmp mfs 64 MB
to me, this just looks like a horrible mess. I have never understood why people should be so keen on creating thousands of microscopic filesystems. For me, the advantage of being able to have several classes of filesystem content all take advantage of the available free space of a filesystem/partition far outweighs any need to segregate classes of filesystem content into separate partitions. For example, how could /usr/X11R6 possibly represent a threat to eat all the space is /usr? X11R6 content is static. (yes, I know, software packages put stuff there, but for the purposes of this discussion it's static). Arguments can presumably be made for /var/www, and /var/mail, /home, /usr/src, and /tmp, but the rest just seems like a waste of energy. I imagine I'd do: / /var /usr and as necessary /var/mail /var/www /usr/src /home /tmp Rob Urban
