| 1 |
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@××××××.info> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 12:11, Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@××××××.info> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> I am seriously thinking of splitting the storage of directories under /usr, |
| 5 |
>>> e.g., /usr/portage and /usr/source actually living somewhere else, on |
| 6 |
>>> different partition and different filesystem. Let's say something mounted on |
| 7 |
>>> /mnt/Persistent. |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>>> My question: should I use bindmount or symlinks to do that? What's the |
| 10 |
>>> drawbacks/benefits for either? |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> I'm sorry, I don't understand. What's the problem of having the |
| 13 |
>> following in /etc/fstab? |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> LABEL=Portage /usr/portage ext4 noatime,auto 0 2 |
| 16 |
>> LABEL=Source /usr/source ext4 noatime,auto 0 2 |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> (Replace LABEL=Portage with /dev/sda7, if you want to.) |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> Why do you need to bindmount or link the directories when you can |
| 21 |
>> mount them wherever you want? |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Because I am avoiding "single partition per directory". And a slight |
| 25 |
> mistake in my original email, it's not just /usr but also /var (and |
| 26 |
> other root-based directories that will not interfere with boot-up / |
| 27 |
> operations) |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Let me give an example: |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Let's say I have /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd, both having single partition |
| 32 |
> each (/dev/sdc1 and /dev/sdd1). |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> /dev/sdc1 will be formatted reiserfs mounted into /mnt/Persistent1 |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> /dev/sdd1 will be formatted ext4 mounted into /mnt/Persistent2 |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> Directories not really necessary for daily operations, such as |
| 39 |
> /usr/src, /usr/portage, /var/db/pkg, and so on and so forth, will each |
| 40 |
> be a subdir under either /mnt/Persistent1 or /mnt/Persistent2 |
| 41 |
> according to each directory's nature. |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> Let's take the example of /usr/src ... I can either make /usr/src a |
| 44 |
> symlink to /mnt/Persistent1/src, or bindmount /mnt/Persistent1/src to |
| 45 |
> /usr/src |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
All of that sounds incredible complicated. Interesting choice of |
| 48 |
partition handling. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
> What will be the benefits/drawbacks for bindmount vs symlink? |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
In my experience, and if you are not dealing with NFS, no respectable |
| 54 |
program cares about a dir being a symlink, so I would use symlinks |
| 55 |
(they are easier to handle). |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Regards. |
| 58 |
-- |
| 59 |
Canek Peláez Valdés |
| 60 |
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación |
| 61 |
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
Archives