Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 00:50:10 +0100 From: "BSDman" <usebsd@free.fr> To: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, "Matthew Dillon" <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: "Ben Rosengart" <ben@skunk.org>, "Bill Fumerola" <billf@chc-chimes.com>, "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM>, <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) Message-ID: <NDBBJDFPGLMLFHLNEEOMKEHPDCAA.usebsd@free.fr> In-Reply-To: <5915.945196712@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote > It would make more sense, considering the way FreeBSD is distributed for > /usr/local to be a mountpoint than for /usr to be a mountpoint. > > /var is traditionally a mountpoint to keep the logs out of harms > way (and vice versa), but /usr never had that level of justification. > one idea about /usr is to allow the admin to mount it read-only. I didn't tried it but this would give some level of security against modifications of the files there in. > It is getting even less justifiable as time progress. The last > sensible argument we had for it was the "load the filesystem from > the first 1024 cylinders or bust" problem. I think the "cylinder" limitation is still of concern. If all OSes come with large root paritions, installing many of them on the same host would be a nightmare. Regards, mouss Free your Net with BSD To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?NDBBJDFPGLMLFHLNEEOMKEHPDCAA.usebsd>