On Wednesday 09 May 2007 23.37.58 Neil Bothwick wrote:
Recent is never recent enough. I used to think daily backups were fine,
until a failure at 5pm cost me a day's work :(
Once an hour synced across 3 computers, with a master copy made daily :)
--
Naga
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Thursday 10 May 2007, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 23:49:45 darren kirby wrote:
I do have a separate /usr, but do not mount it readonly, as I
--sync enough to make remounting it daily rather annoying.
Congratulations! You've just explained why PORTDIR defaulting to
On Thursday 10 May 2007, Neil Bothwick wrote:
3) Better still,
http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_Speeding_up_portage#Make_A_Sparse_File_to_
create_portage_in
I never understood why portage on a sparse file is beneficial. Mine is
on a small reiser logival volume mounted with option tail. It's just
Hello Naga,
Recent is never recent enough. I used to think daily backups were
fine, until a failure at 5pm cost me a day's work :(
Once an hour synced across 3 computers, with a master copy made daily :)
Two separate backup methods, run alternate hours (in case one of them
corrupts the
Hello Alan McKinnon,
I never understood why portage on a sparse file is beneficial. Mine is
on a small reiser logival volume mounted with option tail. It's just
big enough to hold portage with 10-15% free space (the tree doesn't
expand that much over time).
It is faster. If I were going
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 12:05:05 -0500, Dale wrote:
I think you are supposed to link that localtime file instead of
copying. If the file in zoneinfo gets updated then the one in
/etc will still be the old one.
You are not supposed to link it any more, because that will
On Wed, 09 May 2007 19:53:08 +0200, Benno Schulenberg wrote:
You are not supposed to link it any more, because that will break
if /usr has not yet been mounted.
Are there (still) people who have /usr on a separate partition?
And if so, why?
I do, because everything but / and /boot is
Benno Schulenberg wrote:
Are there (still) people who have /usr on a separate partition?
And if so, why?
I only have /home and /usr/portage on separate partitions,
everything else is on /, even /boot.
I have /usr on a separate lvm device just so I can shift around drive
space (my gentoo
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 19:53 +0200, Benno Schulenberg wrote:
Are there (still) people who have /usr on a separate partition?
And if so, why?
Because if you've got a lab full of similarly-configured workstations or
a forward-facing cluster of load-balancing servers, it may be more
convenient
On Wed, 09 May 2007 19:53:08 +0200
Benno Schulenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are there (still) people who have /usr on a separate partition?
And if so, why?
Yes, I'm one of those.
Some say it gives performance boost (I'm not sure about it), but more
importantly it gives (partial)
Hello Daniel Iliev,
Some say it gives performance boost (I'm not sure about it), but more
importantly it gives (partial) protection from file system damage. How
come? The partitions with most frequent writes are those
containing /var /home and /tmp. In case of power failure or system
lock-up
On Wed, 9 May 2007 21:03:58 +0100
Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Daniel Iliev,
Some say it gives performance boost (I'm not sure about it), but
more importantly it gives (partial) protection from file system
damage. How come? The partitions with most frequent writes are
On Wednesday 09 May 2007, Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]':
Hello Daniel Iliev,
Some say it gives performance boost (I'm not sure about it), but more
importantly it gives (partial) protection from file system damage
On Thu, 10 May 2007 00:21:06 +0300, Daniel Iliev wrote:
You could also argue that /usr needs the least protection from
filesystem damage, because it contains no data. /usr can be repaired
with a reinstall, unlike /var, /home or /etc.
That's a good point.
Only for the sake of arguing:
quoth the Benno Schulenberg:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 12:05:05 -0500, Dale wrote:
I think you are supposed to link that localtime file instead of
copying. If the file in zoneinfo gets updated then the one in
/etc will still be the old one.
You are not supposed to
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 22:22, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On Wednesday 09 May 2007, Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]':
Hello Daniel Iliev,
Some say it gives performance boost (I'm not sure about it), but more
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 23:49:45 darren kirby wrote:
I do have a separate /usr, but do not mount it readonly, as I --sync enough
to make remounting it daily rather annoying.
Congratulations! You've just explained why PORTDIR defaulting to /usr/portage
is stupid. The logical location for the
On Wed, 09 May 2007 15:49:45 -0600, darren kirby wrote:
I have heard you can use a separate /usr to enhance security by
mounting it readonly under normal circumstances. This way, bad guys
can't mess with your binaries in /usr/bin and /usr/sbin,
Instead of only being able to get at the really
On Thu, 10 May 2007 01:01:32 +0200, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
I do have a separate /usr, but do not mount it readonly, as I --sync
enough to make remounting it daily rather annoying.
Congratulations! You've just explained why PORTDIR defaulting
to /usr/portage is stupid. The logical
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 01:01 +0200, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 23:49:45 darren kirby wrote:
I do have a separate /usr, but do not mount it readonly, as I --sync enough
to make remounting it daily rather annoying.
Congratulations! You've just explained why PORTDIR
quoth the Neil Bothwick:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 15:49:45 -0600, darren kirby wrote:
I have heard you can use a separate /usr to enhance security by
mounting it readonly under normal circumstances. This way, bad guys
can't mess with your binaries in /usr/bin and /usr/sbin,
Instead of only
On Wed, 09 May 2007 18:31:07 -0600, darren kirby wrote:
quoth the Neil Bothwick:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 15:49:45 -0600, darren kirby wrote:
I have heard you can use a separate /usr to enhance security by
mounting it readonly under normal circumstances. This way, bad guys
can't mess
quoth the Neil Bothwick:
The part I trimmed was though it seems to me if they have access
to mess with your /usr they can mess with anything anyway so... which I
guess could mean what you say you meant rather than how I read it. Sorry
if you think I twisted your post, that wasn't my
23 matches
Mail list logo
