Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 15:39:05 -0800 (PST) From: Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com> To: security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Third /tmp location ? (and maybe a fourth too) Message-ID: <20020226152847.L25859-100000@roble.com> In-Reply-To: <20020226182434.B45921@cowbert.2y.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > File system full errors are typically caused by unnecessary > > partitioning. You rarely see them on single-partition systems. > > Creating symlinks or additional tmp directories to avoid the > > inevitable drawback of excess partitions is two bads, which don't > > sum to a good. Both also violate the KIS principle. > > Unfortunately, as demonstrated in another reply, > the optimal partition scheme (/, /usr, /var) is > preferred over single partition schemes. Preferred by who? Not by the majority of admins I've worked with over the past couple of decades. Neither is there any real gain afforded by a read-only /usr. /usr had to be partitioned years ago because it wouldn't fit on the root disk. With the introduction of 1GB disks there is no longer a good reason to partition /usr though some still rationalize the practice citing unsubstantiated benefits of read-only mounts vs read-only permissions. Creating a partition for /var is also rarely necessary unless your applications require partitioning for performance , pseudo-quotas, or they need more disk than the root volume provides. -- Roger Marquis Roble Systems Consulting http://www.roble.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020226152847.L25859-100000>