On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, Warren Young wrote:
I don’t have a “real” Solaris installation here to try, but the
OpenIndiana, DilOS and SmartOS forks of OpenSolaris all symlink /bin
to /usr/bin. I expect the same is true of Solaris 11, though I
wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Solaris 10 still kep
On Jun 10, 2015, at 12:49 PM, Patrick Hess wrote:
>
> Warren Young wrote:
>> /usr was already assumed to be on the root FS in Solaris, FreeBSD
>
> I'm using both Solaris and FreeBSD quite extensively and, honestly,
> have never heard of that assumption.
I don’t have a “real” Solaris installatio
Warren Young wrote:
> /usr was already assumed to be on the root FS in Solaris, FreeBSD
I'm using both Solaris and FreeBSD quite extensively and, honestly,
have never heard of that assumption. In fact, on the machine that I'm
currently typing this message on, the file systems look like this:
On Jun 8, 2015, at 8:16 PM, g wrote:
>
> On 06/08/2015 09:11 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
>> On 6/8/2015 6:29 PM, Peter wrote:
>>> You can thank Fedora for making that rather pointless change and
>>> breaking that capability.
>>
>> that 'capability' was a holdover of the 1980s when disks were
>> me
On Tue, June 9, 2015 10:51 am, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>
> On 06/08/2015 06:29 PM, Peter wrote:
>> On 06/09/2015 12:19 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
>>> On 6/8/2015 5:08 PM, g wrote:
ie, partition for boot, partition for swap, partition for /,
partition
home, partition for usr, partition for var,
On 06/08/2015 06:29 PM, Peter wrote:
> On 06/09/2015 12:19 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
>> On 6/8/2015 5:08 PM, g wrote:
>>> ie, partition for boot, partition for swap, partition for /, partition
>>> home, partition for usr, partition for var, partition for home2,
>>> partition for what ever.
>>
>>
>
On 06/09/2015 02:13 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> I tend to install my virtual host websites under
> /home/someuser/public_html where there's a someuser for each vhost. the
> default /var/www website is generally completely stubbed off and not
> even used.
That was actually one of the scenarios that
On 06/08/2015 09:11 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 6/8/2015 6:29 PM, Peter wrote:
>> You can thank Fedora for making that rather pointless change and
>> breaking that capability.
>
> that 'capability' was a holdover of the 1980s when disks were
> measured in megabytes, and memory in kilobytes, s
On 6/8/2015 6:35 PM, Peter wrote:
On 06/09/2015 01:31 PM, g wrote:
>>/home in a dedicated partition, sure.
>
>only way i have done it from many years back.
>
>>/var/lib/${DATABASE_OR_WEB_SERVER}, ditto...
>
>if/when i set up a server.
Servers are better off without a separate partition for /
On 6/8/2015 6:29 PM, Peter wrote:
You can thank Fedora for making that rather pointless change and
breaking that capability.
that 'capability' was a holdover of the 1980s when disks were measured
in megabytes, and memory in kilobytes, so large file systems were
impractical.
--
john r pier
On 06/08/2015 08:35 PM, Peter wrote:
> On 06/09/2015 01:31 PM, g wrote:
>>> /home in a dedicated partition, sure.
>>
>> only way i have done it from many years back.
>>
>>> /var/lib/${DATABASE_OR_WEB_SERVER}, ditto...
>>
>> if/when i set up a server.
>
> Servers are better off without a separate
On 06/08/2015 08:29 PM, Peter wrote:
<<>>
> The real issue is that you cannot put /usr on a dedicated partition
> anymore as of CentOS 7. This is because /bin, /lib and /lib64 are
> symbolic linked in the /usr equivalents now. The (previous) purposes of
> having a separate /bin and /lib was so
On 06/09/2015 01:31 PM, g wrote:
>> /home in a dedicated partition, sure.
>
> only way i have done it from many years back.
>
>> /var/lib/${DATABASE_OR_WEB_SERVER}, ditto...
>
> if/when i set up a server.
Servers are better off without a separate partition for /home. Unlike
desktop installs wh
On 06/08/2015 07:19 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 6/8/2015 5:08 PM, g wrote:
>> ie, partition for boot, partition for swap, partition for /, partition
>> home, partition for usr, partition for var, partition for home2,
>> partition for what ever.
>
> that model is not generally recommended anymo
On 06/09/2015 12:19 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 6/8/2015 5:08 PM, g wrote:
>> ie, partition for boot, partition for swap, partition for /, partition
>> home, partition for usr, partition for var, partition for home2,
>> partition for what ever.
>
>
> that model is not generally recommended anym
On 6/8/2015 5:08 PM, g wrote:
ie, partition for boot, partition for swap, partition for /, partition
home, partition for usr, partition for var, partition for home2,
partition for what ever.
that model is not generally recommended anymore, at least not putting
/usr on its own partition, there
On 06/08/2015 06:12 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On 06/08/2015 02:00 PM, g wrote:
<<<>>>
>> just what do you want for a 1st choice?
>
> I think Peter addressed my concern and responded in a way that leads
> me to believe a /home2 as you suggest is not necessary since it will
> be bypassed in terms o
On 06/08/2015 02:00 PM, g wrote:
>
>
> On 06/08/2015 11:34 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> On 06/07/2015 11:05 PM, g wrote:
>>> On 06/07/2015 07:25 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> <<>>
>>>
So, I'm not sure how to interpret what you said. Can I get the same
results from a CentOS install using some
On 06/08/2015 11:34 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On 06/07/2015 11:05 PM, g wrote:
>> On 06/07/2015 07:25 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> <<>>
>>
>>> So, I'm not sure how to interpret what you said. Can I get the same
>>> results from a CentOS install using some combination of options?
>>
>> because your are
Kay Schenk wrote:
> On 06/07/2015 10:11 PM, Peter wrote:
>> On 06/08/2015 12:25 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> My situation is I have 7 separate Linux partitions and a swap area.
>>> One of the partitions is /home, so it's already in its own partition.
>>> I want to keep the partitions for CentOS exact
On 06/07/2015 11:05 PM, g wrote:
>
>
> On 06/07/2015 07:25 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> <<>>
>
>> So, I'm not sure how to interpret what you said. Can I get the same
>> results from a CentOS install using some combination of options?
>
> because your are playing with multi flavors,
> [i bet you l
On 06/07/2015 10:11 PM, Peter wrote:
> On 06/08/2015 12:25 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> My situation is I have 7 separate Linux partitions and a swap area. One
>> of the partitions is /home, so it's already in its own partition.
>> I want to keep the partitions for CentOS exactly as I have them in t
At Sun, 07 Jun 2015 15:16:45 -0700 CentOS mailing list
wrote:
>
> If I choose to do a fresh install of CentOS 6 with "replace existing
> Linux systems", will it also wipe out my /home directory? In the past
> when I've done this with another Linux distro, /home was not affected.
Probably...
>
On 06/07/2015 07:25 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
<<>>
> So, I'm not sure how to interpret what you said. Can I get the same
> results from a CentOS install using some combination of options?
because your are playing with multi flavors,
[i bet you like going to baskin-robbins for ice cream ;-) ]
a sol
On 06/08/2015 12:25 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> My situation is I have 7 separate Linux partitions and a swap area. One
> of the partitions is /home, so it's already in its own partition.
> I want to keep the partitions for CentOS exactly as I have them in terms
> of size, etc. In the past, even when
On 06/07/2015 04:52 PM, g wrote:
>
>
> On 06/07/2015 05:29 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> On 06/07/2015 03:25 PM, Gregory P. Ennis wrote:
> <<<>>>
>
>>> Yes it does replace your home directory. When I do a fresh
>>> install, I back up my home directory on a usb drive and then copy
>>> it back after
On 06/07/2015 05:29 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On 06/07/2015 03:25 PM, Gregory P. Ennis wrote:
<<<>>>
>> Yes it does replace your home directory. When I do a fresh
>> install, I back up my home directory on a usb drive and then copy
>> it back after the install. I think you can also 'muck' with t
On 06/07/2015 03:25 PM, Gregory P. Ennis wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-06-07 at 15:16 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> If I choose to do a fresh install of CentOS 6 with "replace existing
>> Linux systems", will it also wipe out my /home directory? In the past
>> when I've done this with another Linux distro,
On Sun, 2015-06-07 at 15:16 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:
> If I choose to do a fresh install of CentOS 6 with "replace existing
> Linux systems", will it also wipe out my /home directory? In the past
> when I've done this with another Linux distro, /home was not
> affected.
>
> Or, would I need to do
If I choose to do a fresh install of CentOS 6 with "replace existing
Linux systems", will it also wipe out my /home directory? In the past
when I've done this with another Linux distro, /home was not affected.
Or, would I need to do "fresh" install and then muck with partitioning
using a Custom La
30 matches
Mail list logo
