/usr/home vs /home

krad kraduk at gmail.com
Thu Nov 24 10:13:34 UTC 2011

On 22 November 2011 13:36, C. P. Ghost <cpghost at cordula.ws> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:30 AM,  <"Thomas Mueller
> <mueller6727"@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > But I don't see any advantage to putting /, /usr, and /var on separate
> partitions.
> >
> > Tom
> Regarding separate /usr and /var: the advantage is that you can
> keep /usr read-only which is also important for security reasons
> since modifying system binaries becomes less easy.
> Furthermore, you can NFS share a read-only /usr among many
> similar machines, while /var is a per-machine specific read-write
> area.
> -cpghost.
> --
> Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"

I always have /var and /tmp on separate file systems than /, but dont
normally have a separate /usr, bur I have a /usr/local.

I like to keep the /var and /tmp fs separate as they as other are
mentioned. Therefore they are more prone to corruption in event of the
power failure. Keeping / separate in this case should make the system more
likely to reboot. Also it stops application filling up / which can stop you
logging into the system (I havent seen this issue for year admittedly)

/usr/local is just for tidyness as it keeps base os separate from ports etc

I also have /home on a separate as well to stops users filling up root as

my zfsroot boxes have this setup as well, but i also add a few reservations
and quotas.

More information about the freebsd-current mailing list