| 1 |
On Tuesday 02 November 2010, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
> Apparently, though unproven, at 20:19 on Tuesday 02 November 2010, Volker |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Armin Hemmann did opine thusly: |
| 5 |
> > On Tuesday 02 November 2010, Stroller wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > On 2/11/2010, at 10:46am, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 7 |
> > > > ... |
| 8 |
> > > > hard links will only work if /etc/portage and /var/lib/portage are on |
| 9 |
> > > > the same filesystem. Frequently, they are not. |
| 10 |
> > > |
| 11 |
> > > For small values of frequently. |
| 12 |
> > > |
| 13 |
> > > Stroller. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > for every sane system out there. |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > /var is a candidate for surprisingly filling up / to 100% so it is a |
| 18 |
> > smart and sane choice to put it on its own partition where damage will |
| 19 |
> > be reduced to some log files or an aborted emerge. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> You're both right, but for different reasons. It'd done less often on a |
| 22 |
> laptop or personal machine than on a server for instance. And on embedded |
| 23 |
> stuff, almost never. Example: Any junior of mine who doesn't make /var |
| 24 |
> separate is liable to be served his own testicles for dinner, and they |
| 25 |
> know it. But my laptop is one big filesystem. One case definitely needs |
| 26 |
> it, the other one doesn't really. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> You're probably looking at the same question from entirely different needs |
| 29 |
> and viewpoints. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I am looking at the question from the viewpoint of a person who was hit very |
| 32 |
hard in the past. Surprise / fillup thanks to /var or /tmp is no fun at all. |
Archives