[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: deprecating /usr as a standalone filesystem?

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 03:53:23PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
> Gabor Gombas wrote:
>> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 12:38:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>>         it is the principle of the thing. /root is the home directory
>>>  for the  root user.  Home directories are mutable, programs may store
>>>  configuration files there, as may the user, by themselves. The root
>>>  user should not be more constrained than other users on the machine are;
>>>  making wirking as root irritating, less customizable, and harder does
>>>  not help the end user admin any.
>>>         Ideally, we should map /root somewhere persistent, writable, and
>>>  also a location available in single user mode; and there are few
>>>  pleasing solutions that meet that criteria; though less than perfect
>>>  solutions exist.
>> I fail to see how root is different to any other random user in this
>> regard. If you want / to be read-only, then you should ensure that /home
>> points to something writable. The same thing holds for /root. You can
>> make /home and /root to be separate filesystems, or bind mounts or
>> symlinks pointing to a writable location. If you can handle /home today
>> then you can also handle /root exactly the same way.
> No, /root cannot be a separate filesystem.
> /root is part of very basic system, and it is required for super user
> when he/she is restoring the systems or doing some kind of administration
> (e.g. moving filesystems, etc.).

Why do these tasks require a writable (or even present) /root?

  .''`.  Roger Leigh
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux             http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
 `. `'   Printing on GNU/Linux?       http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/
   `-    GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848   Please GPG sign your mail.

Reply to: