Re: Relabel partition didn't work
On Fri, 2007-04-06 at 18:12 +0200, Joe Hart wrote:
> Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 04:41:02PM +0200, Joe Hart wrote:
> >> It seems that many guides say to put your windows partition in
> >> /mnt/windows or /media/windows. That would suggest to me that that is
> >> the place where other file systems go. That's where my question stems
> >> from as to why /mnt and /media are not good places.
> >>
> >
> > Neither to me seem appropriate:
> >
> > /mnt should be empty since most *NIX expect that /mnt is a
> > mountpoint itself for root to mount devices temporarily.
> >
> > /media to me suggests removeable media like CDs, USB, etc.
> >
> >
> > If we consider the iso files like any other file to share between users,
> > where do users put files to share? It used to be that home directories
> > were world-readable so you could keep them in either user's home and the
> > other could access the file if the permissions permitted it.
> >
> > When home directories are not world-accessible, I've suggested a
> > separate directory under /home for such things.
> >
> > I've never run an FTP server so I don't know. Where does the FTP's /pub
> > directory actually sit within its host's filesystem? Perhaps one could
> > learn from that decision.
>
> I much prefer this civil type of correspondence, I must say.
>
> I kind of gathered that from Greg's post, but I was still confused as to
> why this is. I don't know either where /pub is usually located, but I
> do know that it really doesn't matter where someone mounts things.
Here in lies my point. On early BSDI machines, (notice this is the
commercial BSD version), due to inability of BSDI to see drives properly
in some instances...
Everything except the first drive, was mounted on /drives/$drivename/
This then lead to symbolic linking and many other wonderful methods of
making good use of drive space.
In fact only a skeleton of /usr was actually on the first drive, we had
to "move" /usr to /usr1 and then ln -s /drives/$drivename/usr /usr in
order to get things to work properly.
Then there was /usr containing the actual user's home directory. This
was a serious pain, as by default BSDI's tools wouldn't allow anything
to be done with this regard, so we had to "customize" the mounting and
fsck tools to be wrappers.
And that was only the first of the bootup issues.
> Because as long as /etc/fstab points to an existing directory, things
> can be mounted there. I have drives inside of drives. For example:
>
> My /dev/hda2 mounts to /media/share and /dev/sda8 mounts to
> /media/share/audio, /dev/sda9 mounts to /media/share/video. Even though
> they are on separate drives they mount with no trouble. That's one
> thing I really like about the way the file system works. Even without
> LVM it is simple to combine or separate different drives.
>
> Perhaps after following this thread I should move the mount points to a
> more FHS compliant location. The places need to be accessible to
> multiple users, but that is easy enough to fix with proper groups and
> permissions, so that isn't really an issue, it's more having to
> reconfigure the apps.
Remember, symbolic links help transition and changes made to systems
become less problematic.
> After typing this, I think it is worth doing, because my system as it is
> now isn't very secure and I could and should improve that.
>
> Thanks for the clear explanation.
Just remember, any infrastructure put in place can and will change. The
FHS has changed quite dramatically and has caused many a system to have
serious legacy problems during those changes. FHS is after all a
guideline, it is your machine. If it isn't on contract support where the
vendor demands a certain environment, and the support is yours and it
wouldn't be too hard for someone to pickup the ball if you got taken out
by the Bus-Factor, then ehhh, what is the problem?
Remember, FHS is a very nice guideline and works for many. Just that
legacy of systems that have migrated from DOS v4.01 to BSDI in 1992 to
FreeBSD in 1997 to RedHat Linux in 2003 to Debian Etch last week will
have some significant areas of gray and remnants of the original
system(s).
P.S. Even as of last week, some processing is still done inside a
FreeDOS emulator running a 1988 DOS executable.
--
greg, greg@gregfolkert.net
Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's
Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive
product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at
the playfield. -- Thane Walkup
Reply to: