Partitioning for a new system -- Third level mount point?

Ronald F. Guilmette rfg at
Sat Sep 5 04:00:25 UTC 2015

In message <20150905031925.fd21458a.freebsd at>, you wrote:

>On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 17:34:36 -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>> I'm setiing up a new system to run FreeBSD 10.2, and in the process
>> of doing a ``manual'' initial partitioning of the main drive for
>> this new system, I attempted to create a partition for which I
>> specified a mount point of:
>> 	/var/ftp/private
>> Anyway, I was shocked to see... after doing the create step... that
>> this new partition is listed in the partitions list as having a mount
>> point of just:
>> 	/var/ftp
>> which is definitely not what I wanted.
>Maybe this happened because the desired mountpoint /var/ftp/private
>didn't exist yet, so /var/ftp was being used?

AHHHHHHH!  Yes.  Perhaps that is the explanation.

However please note that the directory /var/ftp did not exist yet at the
time that I was setiing up my partitions, and yet the partitioning tool
graciously and automagically inferred (correctly) that I wanted to have
that created for me... since I clearly planned to use it as a mount point.
(And since I elected... because of the problem in using /var/ftp/private...
to make /var/ftp a partition instead, I _can_ say with some certainty
that the install-time manual partitioning tool did in fact cause that
(/var/ftp) to be created... or at any rate, something did.

So anyway, I do believe that I will file a PR on this.  I think that the
partitioning tool should be gracious in all cases, and should create
directories, as necessary (and however many levels are necessary) in
order to accomodate the user's stated preferences with respect to mount
points of partitions that are being created.

>However, if you create /var/ftp/private and then edit the entry
>in /etc/fstab for that partition, things should work as inteded.

Too tedious.

(As I get older, and closer to death, I am more inclined to use GUIs
rather than command line tools.  It's not that I'm lazy.  It's that
I'm in a hurry.)

>> Did I do something wrong, or is the install-time ``manual'' partitioning
>> tool actually limiting the number of pathname components for the mount
>> points to just two?
>> If so, isn't that a bit... um... arbitrary?
>At least an error message should have been issued. A "silent
>fallback" which "guesses" what the user might have wanted usually
>is not a good idea

I can only agree.


More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list