Re: [CentOS] Upgrade

Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:17:47 -0700

[email protected] wrote: 
Whit Blauvelt wrote:
  
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 02:29:32PM -0400, [email protected] wrote:

    
And as others have said, /home, and maybe /opt, should *always* be other
drives, or at least other partitions....
      
Kind of makes you wonder why RH's default install is to shove everything
but boot into one partition these days, doesn't it? In trying to make
everything immune from the most clueless users - who might (horrors) make
a partition too small - RH defaults to something other than time-honored
old-school best practices. Yeah, I never accept the defaults. But I'm not
    

Very, dare I say it?, Windows-ish. On the other hand, for an enterprise
O/S, I would sorta-kinda assume that /home was being NFS-mounted. Just
about everywhere I've worked, it is.
<snip>
Not trying to hijack but this last comment has provoked a question.
<hijack>
If you have multiple CentOS machines that you regularly log onto and use, and these share a common /home/username (via NFS or other SAN mechanism) how do the various .xxxx files manage to work - aren't there potential conflicts?
I have two CentOS 5.5 workstations with dual monitors (different sizes though) and another machine with only a single display - wouldn't this cause issues? Unfortunately I do not have enough experience to know what all these various . files contain - if they're only personal preferences and totally unrelated to the hardware then well and good - can someone confirm before I migrate my /home onto my main server and NFS mount it. TIA
</hijack>
          mark

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

<<attachment: rkampen.vcf>>

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Reply via email to