Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 /usr/portage is stupid. The logical location for the tree would be on /var ... :) You are perfectly correct. That's why I have: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ $ mount | grep /var /dev/mapper/vg-var on /var type reiserfs (rw,noatime,notail) /dev/mapper/vg-portage on /var/portage type reiserfs (rw,noatime) /dev/mapper/vg-distfiles on /var/distfiles type reiserfs (rw,noatime,notail) Note that distfiles is not a sub-dir of portage either -- Optimists say the glass is half full, Pessimists say the glass is half empty, Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be? Alan McKinnon alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za +27 82, double three seven, one nine three five -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 big enough to hold portage with 10-15% free space (the tree doesn't expand that much over time). Care to elabortae on the benfits you get doing it your way? -- Optimists say the glass is half full, Pessimists say the glass is half empty, Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be? Alan McKinnon alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za +27 82, double three seven, one nine three five -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 backup) with an off-site backup to my Strongspace account three times a day. Belt, braces and string :) -- Neil Bothwick A friend in need may turn out to be a nuisance. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 to use reiserfs (I use ext2 for this) I'd use it with notail, the tail packing impacts performance. I'm more interested in speed than saving disk space. -- Neil Bothwick We shall shortly be landing. Please return your stewardess to the upright position. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 break if /usr has not yet been mounted. 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. Benno -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 on LVM. Even if you don't have a separate /usr, the current method is far easier to maintain because your timezone is set in one of the standard configuration files rather than a symlink somewhere else. -- Neil Bothwick I am Homer of the Borg. You will be assim Hmm... Donuts... signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 machine is an older machine with not a ton of HD space, so the ability to change the sizes of different volumes is great!) R -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 to have them all mount /usr, /home, etc. from a centrally-managed file server. -- Albert W. Hopkins -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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) 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 the chances are better that a file system not taking writes at the moment would survive the crash. Following this logic and since /usr contains most of the programs and /bin /sbin contain most of the basic OS, those should reside on partitions with rare writes. -- Best regards, Daniel -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
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. How come? The partitions with most frequent writes are those containing /var /home and /tmp. In case of power failure or system lock-up the chances are better that a file system not taking writes at the moment would survive the crash. Following this logic and since /usr contains most of the programs and /bin /sbin contain most of the basic OS, those should reside on partitions with rare writes. 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. -- Neil Bothwick They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 those containing /var /home and /tmp. In case of power failure or system lock-up the chances are better that a file system not taking writes at the moment would survive the crash. Following this logic and since /usr contains most of the programs and /bin /sbin contain most of the basic OS, those should reside on partitions with rare writes. 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: those need no FS protection, but recent back-ups :) -- Best regards, Daniel -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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. 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 my view, which is why /usr (fast, RAID0) is separate from / (containing /etc; RAID6) on my machine. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.org/ \_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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: those need no FS protection, but recent back-ups :) Recent is never recent enough. I used to think daily backups were fine, until a failure at 5pm cost me a day's work :( -- Neil Bothwick Forget the Joneses...I can't keep up with The Simpsons. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 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 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, though it seems to me if they have access to mess with your /usr they can mess with anything anyway so... I do have a separate /usr, but do not mount it readonly, as I --sync enough to make remounting it daily rather annoying. I only have /home and /usr/portage on separate partitions, everything else is on /, even /boot. Benno -d -- darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org ...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected... - Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 importantly it gives (partial) protection from file system damage. 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 my view, which is why /usr (fast, RAID0) is separate from / (containing /etc; RAID6) on my machine. These days I keep /usr/portage on a separate partition to minimise fs fragmentation. On an old slooow box of mine I have /usr/local/bin and /usr/local/lib on separate disks, as well as /var/tmp and /usr/bin and keep them on primary partitions for extra speed and parallel access/processing across two different IDE controllers: http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Multi-Disk-HOWTO.html One can get really silly at this, I certainly did, but on modern machines with SATA drives the difference in speed is probably marginal. I didn't keep notes of any benchmarks but despite the asthmatic hardware my multi-disk/partitioning scheme did pay some noticeable dividends as far as I can recall. Of course, YMMV. -- Regards, Mick pgpbDa8zxBFRq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 tree would be on /var ... :) -- Bo Andresen signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 important stuff in /bin and /sbin? I do have a separate /usr, but do not mount it readonly, as I --sync enough to make remounting it daily rather annoying. 1) Use a script to remount /usr, sysnc, remount /usr 2) Much better, use a separate filesystem for /usr/portage (or put it on /var) 3) Better still, http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_Speeding_up_portage#Make_A_Sparse_File_to_create_portage_in -- Neil Bothwick One World, One Web, One Program - Microsoft Promotional Ad Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer - Adolf Hitler signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 location for the tree would be on /var ... :) Except that running emerge --sync without following it with emerge --update is rather pointless, and that would require /usr to be mounted rw wherever $PORTDIR was. I do agree that /var is a far more logical location. -- Neil Bothwick Top Oxymorons Number 26: Software documentation signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 defaulting to /usr/portage is stupid. The logical location for the tree would be on /var ... :) I think the original reason for this is that FreeBSD ports is also in /usr/ports. FS-optimization freaks (like myself) can always generate a sparse file and/or mount /usr/portage somewhere else. A script that does the update after this (w/ remounting and the like) is no big magic. Regards, Aleks -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 being able to get at the really important stuff in /bin and /sbin? Well, very nice how you trimmed the part of my original email that speaks to your question and makes the same point as you, but thanks for making me look stupid anyway... Yeah, I know, I make myself look stupid, right ;) -d -- darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org ...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected... - Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 with your binaries in /usr/bin and /usr/sbin, Instead of only being able to get at the really important stuff in /bin and /sbin? Well, very nice how you trimmed the part of my original email that speaks to your question and makes the same point as you, but thanks for making me look stupid anyway... 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 intention. -- Neil Bothwick Remember that the Titanic was built by experts, and the Ark by a newbie signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Separate /usr [was: Clock is way off]
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 intention. It's cool, I just thought it was funny ;) -d -- darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org ...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected... - Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
