Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 19:45:40 +0000 From: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Where do user files go these days? Message-ID: <20141109194540.20c574dd@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <3272471.UYQ3DxhorQ@curlew.lan> References: <545ED36B.8040207@gmail.com> <545F5AD6.6000404@FreeBSD.org> <545F7B85.1050900@qeng-ho.org> <3272471.UYQ3DxhorQ@curlew.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 15:30:10 +0000 Mike Clarke wrote: > On Sunday 09 Nov 2014 14:34:45 Arthur Chance wrote: > > On 09/11/2014 12:15, Matthew Seaman wrote: > > [snip] > > > > Now, moving /home into /usr/home and making a compatibility > > > symlink > > > might make sense for some partitioning schemes with UFS, but it > > > certainly doesn't when installing with ZFS or with an all-in-one > > > style UFS partition. > > I've never understood the logic of putting /home under /usr. If you > ever needed to do a fresh install from scratch it would be all too > easy to wipe out all of home when you delete the original contents of > /usr. I've always assumed that it was to avoid having to decide how to divide UFS disk space between /home and /usr, since it's pretty much impossible to come up with a default that isn't badly wrong for some users. And it was only a default.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20141109194540.20c574dd>