| 1 |
On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 18:03:50 +0100 |
| 2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:44:31 +0100 |
| 5 |
> Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> > >>>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > >> I think it is more like people do that when they have a good |
| 10 |
> > >> reason to do so. I plan to put mine on /usr when I get the |
| 11 |
> > >> chance and know that this init crap isn't going to break my |
| 12 |
> > >> rig. It's not being "awesome" either. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > > Remind me of a single good reason. Last time I heard those were |
| 15 |
> > > mostly hacks and laziness. |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > /usr can be mounted readonly, while / and /var cannot? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> What is the point of mounting the less important part of the system |
| 20 |
> read-only while the more important one is writable? |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Also, it should be possible to mount rootfs read-only with |
| 23 |
> separate /var. Of course, that would require the software to be |
| 24 |
> actually FHS-compliant and not put runtime-written files in /etc. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
security? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Matthew Thode (prometheanfire) |
Archives