1 |
On Nov 26, 2015 08:30, "lee" <lee@××××××××.de> wrote: |
2 |
> waltdnes@××××××××.org writes: |
3 |
> > compromised with a small / partition, with empty /home, /opt, /var, |
4 |
> > /usr, and /tmp directories. Their real equivalents are bind-mounted |
5 |
> > from a much larger partition. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> Why don't you just mount the large partition somewhere under /mnt and |
8 |
> create symlinks to the directories that are missing on the small |
9 |
> partition? |
10 |
|
11 |
wrt space, that doesn't really change things. |
12 |
wrt symlinks, some legacy tools, and regular unix tools have a completely |
13 |
different behavior when traversing symlinks as opposed to regular |
14 |
directories, which bindmounts emulate. although in practice i imagine it |
15 |
wont affect him. |
16 |
|
17 |
youre really just proposing a different way to do the same thing albeit his |
18 |
approach is more stable. |
19 |
|
20 |
> Or, why don't you copy the system to the disk that has the large |
21 |
> partition and retire the 500MB disk? That would reduce power |
22 |
> consumption and increase reliability by having less disks in use and by |
23 |
> making it more unlikely to mess up anything due to excessive |
24 |
> partitioning. |
25 |
|
26 |
its not 2 disks, its one disk and with partitions. at any rate his approach |
27 |
is valid. |