Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #202916 > unrolled thread

[OT?] home partition vs. home directory

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Default User <hunguponcontent@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 18:20 +0100
    Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2018-11-30 18:30 +0100
      Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Cindy-Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 21:50 +0100
        Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Joel Roth <joelz@pobox.com> - 2018-11-30 22:40 +0100
          Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-12-01 03:50 +0100
            Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Joel Roth <joelz@pobox.com> - 2018-12-01 21:10 +0100
        Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2018-12-01 02:40 +0100
          Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-12-01 02:50 +0100
            Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2018-12-01 03:30 +0100
              Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-12-01 04:20 +0100
              Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2018-12-01 09:00 +0100
                Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-12-01 16:10 +0100
      Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-12-01 03:20 +0100
      Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2018-12-02 21:10 +0100
    Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2018-11-30 18:30 +0100
      Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Jimmy Johnson <field.engineer@gmail.com> - 2018-12-01 10:30 +0100
        Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2018-12-01 15:20 +0100
    Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Michael Thompson <michaelw.thompson@icloud.com> - 2018-11-30 18:40 +0100
      Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-11-30 20:00 +0100
        Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2018-11-30 20:20 +0100
          Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-11-30 22:30 +0100
        Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2018-12-01 01:30 +0100
          Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2018-12-01 03:40 +0100
          Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-12-01 16:10 +0100
            Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-12-01 17:30 +0100
            Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2018-12-01 18:30 +0100
              Re: [OT?] home partition vs. home directory Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-12-01 21:10 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#202916 — [OT?] home partition vs. home directory

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

I often see people recommend a separate home partition.

But why would (or not) that be better than just a home directory within the
root directory?

Wouldn't one less partition be simpler, and therefore (all other things
being equal) better?

Opinions, please.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#202917

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 12:14:40PM -0500, Default User wrote:
>    I often see people recommend a separate home partition. 
>    But why would (or not) that be better than just a home directory within
>    the root directory?
>    Wouldn't one less partition be simpler, and therefore (all other things
>    being equal) better?
>    Opinions, please.

The main reasons for a separate home partition are to share it between
multiple installations in a multi-boot scenario and/or to allow for easy
re-installation of the OS while preserving everything under /home.

If neither of those apply, then a separate home partition is not
especially beneficial.

Regards,

-Roberto
-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202923

On 11/30/18, Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 12:14:40PM -0500, Default User wrote:
>>    I often see people recommend a separate home partition.
>>    But why would (or not) that be better than just a home directory
>> within
>>    the root directory?
>>    Wouldn't one less partition be simpler, and therefore (all other
>> things
>>    being equal) better?
>>    Opinions, please.
>
> The main reasons for a separate home partition are to share it between
> multiple installations in a multi-boot scenario and/or to allow for easy
> re-installation of the OS while preserving everything under /home.
>
> If neither of those apply, then a separate home partition is not
> especially beneficial.


Cliff's Notes Version Part I: Flaky USB connections are an important
factor! An accidentally disconnected USB connection can cause data to
become *unknowingly* redirected back to the original directory on the
primary partition. That situation can then potentially lead to loss of
e.g. downloaded data if a user is not always 100% aware of where data
is actually residing at all times.....

Cliff's Notes Version Part II: One Debian-User mused about binding
even deeper into ~/ child directories instead of just ~/. I LIKE THAT
for software configuration compatibility reasons. It's my next
intended setup. :)

The "so what had happened was" version: I started playing with this a
few months ago. I LIKE IT primarily because I finally got brave enough
to learn how to add lines to fstab to go a different, slightly more
complicated mount route for computing.

Because I've experienced a deal-breaking software configuration
compatibility problem, the one thing I'm always hesitant about is that
*once in a while* there might be that compatibility issue with
software package user config files under /home/user (~/).

Browsers are where I experienced that episode. When I tried to step
back down after an upgrade didn't work, what a mess! That became my
firsthand experience in deleting those *not hidden* (grin) "dot files"
under /home/user. It could overwhelming super quick if that same
incompatibility began occurring across all the various distros a user
might have ready to boot up at any second.

An important aside is that one HAS to know what's saved in those
config files if deleting them becomes necessary. Sometimes there are
bookmarks and other suchly important information. I get around that
point by renaming instead of deleting. I use last date used as a
cull-friendly milestone marker when renaming important directories.

With respect to separate home partitions, one Debian-User recently
mentioned that they avoid the software configuration compatibility
issue by further breaking their setup down. They have things like
~/Documents and ~/Downloads each shared via a separate partition (or
similar) instead of only the whole ~/ directory.. I LIKE that thought
process. It's what I'll be attempting* with mine the next time I feel
like messing with it.

Having lately been successfully "mount -B" ing my
/var/cache/apt/archives hoard, I can now easily see having those
(~/Documents, ~/Downloads, et al) each remaining as their own separate
directories on a secondary partition. Fstab would then be asked to
step-by-step put each of them to work as a singular entry connected up
at each reboot...

OR NOT.... But I'm leaning super heavy toward trying that route soon
just because the test run with my archive stash has been working so
well to date. :)

Oh, wait, EXCEPT THAT there is one serious CAVEAT that comes to mind.
Having something like ~/ on a secondary partition is a notable "not so
much" if the secondary partition is connected via an unstable USB
connection.

Unstable USB connections complicate things super quick. It would be
easy to start losing data if a user is not self-educated in how to
recognize where their data is actually residing in their system. What
can happen is that a flaky USB connection will close, but you could
still be saving data to the /home/user directory under /.

WHEN A FLAKY USB CONNECTION FAILS, WHAT HAPPENS IS: Your mind will be
thinking you're safely saving important data under /dev/sdh6/home
(your secondary partition) when instead a closed USB connection means
that data goes back directly under /dev/sda2/home (i.e. your primary
partition).

SOMETIMES YOU GET LUCKY and your system will complain that a mounted
directory is suddenly missing, but you do NOT always get that lucky.

Where that can be detrimental is if you a-sumed all had always stayed
connected and thus worked as planned and so you go off and delete an
entire operating system to get set up for a shiny new install. What
you will have done is you will have innocently deleted all e.g.
recently downloaded data that had accidentally been redirected back
directly into /home/user. I avoid that disaster by always one last
time manually verifying what's left sitting in /home, /media, /mnt,
AND some various personal /var/* directories.

As another aside, I've more than a few times caught and rescued rsync
backup whoopsies that ended up saved as hard data under /mnt and
/media. Check, check, and double-check then check one more last time
because things do not always work as intended.. :)

Cindy :)
-- 
Cindy-Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA

* runs with duct tape *

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202925

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 Cindy-Sue Causey wrote:
> Cliff's Notes Version Part I: Flaky USB connections are an important
> factor! An accidentally disconnected USB connection can cause data to
> become *unknowingly* redirected back to the original directory on the
> primary partition. That situation can then potentially lead to loss of
> e.g. downloaded data if a user is not always 100% aware of where data
> is actually residing at all times.....

Hi,

I've had problems with flakey connections with external USB
drives for years. These problems have occurred with various
drives and on two different laptops. The usual result is a
disk operation such as 'ls' fails with the message
"input/output error". This usually happens after
the drive has been idle for some hours. 

In my experience, the only case where writes went into
directory of the mount point (and not the intended
partition) was when the partition was not mounted. Once an
I/O error occurs, at least in my system, no further read or
write operations to the mount point will succeed. 

with regards

-- 
Joel Roth
  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202933

On Fri 30 Nov 2018 at 11:23:57 (-1000), Joel Roth wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 Cindy-Sue Causey wrote:
> > Cliff's Notes Version Part I: Flaky USB connections are an important
> > factor! An accidentally disconnected USB connection can cause data to
> > become *unknowingly* redirected back to the original directory on the
> > primary partition. That situation can then potentially lead to loss of
> > e.g. downloaded data if a user is not always 100% aware of where data
> > is actually residing at all times.....
> 
> I've had problems with flakey connections with external USB
> drives for years. These problems have occurred with various
> drives and on two different laptops. The usual result is a
> disk operation such as 'ls' fails with the message
> "input/output error". This usually happens after
> the drive has been idle for some hours. 

Hm, with poor connections, I find that it's usually the laptop
moving about which disturbs the cable and causes the problem.
After idle periods, I just get the message, when it wakes up:
 usb 4-5: reset high-speed USB device number 4 using ehci-pci
which I assume may be because the USB was in some sort of
powersaving mode.

> In my experience, the only case where writes went into
> directory of the mount point (and not the intended
> partition) was when the partition was not mounted. Once an
> I/O error occurs, at least in my system, no further read or
> write operations to the mount point will succeed. 

I've never had the mount points overwritten, perhaps because
of how I set their permissions:
drwx------ 2 root root 4096 Apr 11  2018 cdrom0/
and I
# touch -r cdrom0   all the mount points ...
so it's easy to see when they're in use as the differing
permission/ownership/timestamp sticks out.

It also sounds as if you have   ,errors=remount-ro,
set as an option in your /etc/fstab entries so that any
error immediately write-protects the partition; though
I didn't know that prevents reading as well. Does it?

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202950

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:39:55PM -0600, David Wright wrote:
> On Fri 30 Nov 2018 at 11:23:57 (-1000), Joel Roth wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 Cindy-Sue Causey wrote:
> > > Cliff's Notes Version Part I: Flaky USB connections are an important
> > > factor! An accidentally disconnected USB connection can cause data to
> > > become *unknowingly* redirected back to the original directory on the
> > > primary partition. That situation can then potentially lead to loss of
> > > e.g. downloaded data if a user is not always 100% aware of where data
> > > is actually residing at all times.....
> > 
> > I've had problems with flakey connections with external USB
> > drives for years. These problems have occurred with various
> > drives and on two different laptops. The usual result is a
> > disk operation such as 'ls' fails with the message
> > "input/output error". This usually happens after
> > the drive has been idle for some hours. 
> 
> Hm, with poor connections, I find that it's usually the laptop
> moving about which disturbs the cable and causes the problem.
> After idle periods, I just get the message, when it wakes up:
>  usb 4-5: reset high-speed USB device number 4 using ehci-pci
> which I assume may be because the USB was in some sort of
> powersaving mode.
 
> > In my experience, the only case where writes went into
> > directory of the mount point (and not the intended
> > partition) was when the partition was not mounted. Once an
> > I/O error occurs, at least in my system, no further read or
> > write operations to the mount point will succeed. 
> 
> I've never had the mount points overwritten, perhaps because
> of how I set their permissions:
> drwx------ 2 root root 4096 Apr 11  2018 cdrom0/
> and I
> # touch -r cdrom0   all the mount points ...
> so it's easy to see when they're in use as the differing
> permission/ownership/timestamp sticks out.

Nice. I usually make a fstab entry for device
and do a mount -a whenever I plug in a new device.

> It also sounds as if you have   ,errors=remount-ro,
> set as an option in your /etc/fstab entries so that any
> error immediately write-protects the partition; though
> I didn't know that prevents reading as well. Does it?

I don't think my devices got remounted, as in that case
they would be at least read accessible. I do use remount-ro
option. 

One of these I/O errors ends the party completely.
Seems obvious that I should check kern.log for clues
next time I observe it.

I've never lost data due to these  errors, just
can be frustrating if the devices need unplugging and remounting.

^^


> Cheers,
> David.
> 

-- 
Joel Roth
  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202928

On 11/30/18 3:47 PM, Cindy-Sue Causey wrote:

> Having lately been successfully "mount -B" ing my
> /var/cache/apt/archives hoard, I can now easily see having those
> (~/Documents, ~/Downloads, et al) each remaining as their own separate
> directories on a secondary partition. Fstab would then be asked to
> step-by-step put each of them to work as a singular entry connected up
> at each reboot...

Cindy, I advocate using /opt for that very reason. I leave /home/user 
alone. I create /opt/user directory and fill it with the usual 
/home/user directories, such as Documents, Downloads, Music, Videos and 
the like. Those directories contain ther actual files and are safe if 
root partition gets clobbered or the OS becomes too wonky from 
installing all the things. CLEAN re-install also cleans screwed up 
config files in the home dot-files/directories, that you really do not 
want to keep. . I've done this since the Caldera (pre-RedHAT IPO) era. 
"Nary a burp in the barrel." as they used to say in Popular Electronics.

"Carl and Jerry" Enjoy!! Ric
http://www.copperwood.com/carlandjerry.htm#BackInPrint

-- 
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202929

On Friday, November 30, 2018 08:32:23 PM Ric Moore wrote:
> On 11/30/18 3:47 PM, Cindy-Sue Causey wrote:
> > Having lately been successfully "mount -B" ing my
> > /var/cache/apt/archives hoard, I can now easily see having those
> > (~/Documents, ~/Downloads, et al) each remaining as their own separate
> > directories on a secondary partition. Fstab would then be asked to
> > step-by-step put each of them to work as a singular entry connected up
> > at each reboot...
> 
> Cindy, I advocate using /opt for that very reason. I leave /home/user
> alone. I create /opt/user directory and fill it with the usual
> /home/user directories, such as Documents, Downloads, Music, Videos and
> the like. Those directories contain ther actual files and are safe if
> root partition gets clobbered or the OS becomes too wonky from
> installing all the things. CLEAN re-install also cleans screwed up
> config files in the home dot-files/directories, that you really do not
> want to keep. . I've done this since the Caldera (pre-RedHAT IPO) era.
> "Nary a burp in the barrel." as they used to say in Popular Electronics.

Why bother with /opt -- iirc, /opt is for optional software, not user data.

I simply create a top level directory (often using my initials, e.g. /abc for 
my user data  (~/Documents, ~/Downloads, et al -- i.e., /abc/Documents, ...).

/opt may get filled with stuff that I don't want to treat as (my) user data.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202931

On 11/30/18 8:45 PM, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, November 30, 2018 08:32:23 PM Ric Moore wrote:
>> On 11/30/18 3:47 PM, Cindy-Sue Causey wrote:
>>> Having lately been successfully "mount -B" ing my
>>> /var/cache/apt/archives hoard, I can now easily see having those
>>> (~/Documents, ~/Downloads, et al) each remaining as their own separate
>>> directories on a secondary partition. Fstab would then be asked to
>>> step-by-step put each of them to work as a singular entry connected up
>>> at each reboot...
>>
>> Cindy, I advocate using /opt for that very reason. I leave /home/user
>> alone. I create /opt/user directory and fill it with the usual
>> /home/user directories, such as Documents, Downloads, Music, Videos and
>> the like. Those directories contain ther actual files and are safe if
>> root partition gets clobbered or the OS becomes too wonky from
>> installing all the things. CLEAN re-install also cleans screwed up
>> config files in the home dot-files/directories, that you really do not
>> want to keep. . I've done this since the Caldera (pre-RedHAT IPO) era.
>> "Nary a burp in the barrel." as they used to say in Popular Electronics.
> 
> Why bother with /opt -- iirc, /opt is for optional software, not user data.
> 
> I simply create a top level directory (often using my initials, e.g. /abc for
> my user data  (~/Documents, ~/Downloads, et al -- i.e., /abc/Documents, ...).
> 
> /opt may get filled with stuff that I don't want to treat as (my) user data.

True true, but you may select the /opt partition from the install menu 
and not re-format it. Once you boot into your fresh install, /opt is 
correctly mounted and by making the necessary links from /home/user to 
/opt/user you have a fully repopulated home directory. I also have 
.mozilla and .thunderbird down there for safe keeping as well. A fresh 
re-install is very painless. Been doing this successfully for almost 20 
years. Ric


-- 
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202934

On Fri 30 Nov 2018 at 21:21:50 (-0500), Ric Moore wrote:
> On 11/30/18 8:45 PM, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, November 30, 2018 08:32:23 PM Ric Moore wrote:
> > > Cindy, I advocate using /opt for that very reason. I leave /home/user
> > > alone. I create /opt/user directory and fill it with the usual
> > > /home/user directories, such as Documents, Downloads, Music, Videos and
> > > the like. Those directories contain ther actual files and are safe if
> > > root partition gets clobbered or the OS becomes too wonky from
> > > installing all the things. CLEAN re-install also cleans screwed up
> > > config files in the home dot-files/directories, that you really do not
> > > want to keep. . I've done this since the Caldera (pre-RedHAT IPO) era.
> > > "Nary a burp in the barrel." as they used to say in Popular Electronics.
> > 
> > Why bother with /opt -- iirc, /opt is for optional software, not user data.
> > 
> > I simply create a top level directory (often using my initials, e.g. /abc for
> > my user data  (~/Documents, ~/Downloads, et al -- i.e., /abc/Documents, ...).
> > 
> > /opt may get filled with stuff that I don't want to treat as (my) user data.
> 
> True true, but you may select the /opt partition from the install menu
> and not re-format it. Once you boot into your fresh install, /opt is
> correctly mounted and by making the necessary links from /home/user to
> /opt/user you have a fully repopulated home directory. I also have
> .mozilla and .thunderbird down there for safe keeping as well. A fresh
> re-install is very painless. Been doing this successfully for almost
> 20 years. Ric

I just copy them all into ~/<release-name>.dotfiles/, which keeps them
within the encrypted fold. For programs that write a new set of
configuration files where none exists, I let them do that, and then
reapply my own modifications. Where I find incompatibilities, I use
scripts that juggle symlinks, eg mutt, mc, audacious etc.

In the case of the browser, I usually let the new version handle the
transition, and then I don't go back. I enforce that commitment by
having the browser-launching functions look up my permitted
release/hostname combinations in an environment variable.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202936

Le 01/12/2018 à 03:21, Ric Moore a écrit :
> On 11/30/18 8:45 PM, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Why bother with /opt -- iirc, /opt is for optional software, not user 
>> data.

Right.

> True true, but you may select the /opt partition from the install menu 
> and not re-format it.

You can select arbitrary mount points in the installer. All you have to 
do is type the path. For example I did it to use a separate filesystem 
for /var/log (so that flooding logs would not fill the whole /var or /).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202941

On Saturday, December 01, 2018 02:54:22 AM Pascal Hambourg wrote:
> Le 01/12/2018 à 03:21, Ric Moore a écrit :
> > On 11/30/18 8:45 PM, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Why bother with /opt -- iirc, /opt is for optional software, not user
> >> data.
> 
> Right.
> 
> > True true, but you may select the /opt partition from the install menu
> > and not re-format it.
> 
> You can select arbitrary mount points in the installer. All you have to
> do is type the path. 


> For example I did it to use a separate filesystem
> for /var/log (so that flooding logs would not fill the whole /var or /).

+ 10 (or 100, or 1000 ...)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202930

On Fri 30 Nov 2018 at 12:23:11 (-0500), Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 12:14:40PM -0500, Default User wrote:
> >    I often see people recommend a separate home partition. 
> >    But why would (or not) that be better than just a home directory within
> >    the root directory?
> >    Wouldn't one less partition be simpler, and therefore (all other things
> >    being equal) better?
> >    Opinions, please.
> 
> The main reasons for a separate home partition are to share it between
> multiple installations in a multi-boot scenario and/or to allow for easy
> re-installation of the OS while preserving everything under /home.

I would agree with that; all my systems are multiboot for periods of
time (after new Debian releases), usually with consecutive releases,
as I flip back and forth between two root filesystems.

But another reason for a separate home partition is that I encrypt it
in case the computer is lost or stolen. I don't feel that the methods
available for encrypting the entire system are routine enough to
bother with presently.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202969

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 1/12/18 6:23 AM, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 12:14:40PM -0500, Default User wrote:
>>    I often see people recommend a separate home partition. 
>>    But why would (or not) that be better than just a home directory within
>>    the root directory?
>>    Wouldn't one less partition be simpler, and therefore (all other things
>>    being equal) better?
>>    Opinions, please.
> 
> The main reasons for a separate home partition are to share it between
> multiple installations in a multi-boot scenario and/or to allow for easy
> re-installation of the OS while preserving everything under /home.
> 
> If neither of those apply, then a separate home partition is not
> especially beneficial.

Two others for me:

1. some dodgy software writing in my home directory can't fill up the
root filesystem (also, probably moreso, applies to /var(/log))

2. backup utilities can usually be told to stop at filesystem
boundaries, which can be simpler than writing explicit exclude lists etc.

Richard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202918

Am Freitag, 30. November 2018, 18:14:40 CET schrieb Default User:
When you are using a seperate home-partition you can easily install the whole 
system new - and all user specific content will be saved and will not have to 
configured by the user(s) again.

In case, you have no backup from the users......

Best

Hans

> I often see people recommend a separate home partition.
> 
> But why would (or not) that be better than just a home directory within the
> root directory?
> 
> Wouldn't one less partition be simpler, and therefore (all other things
> being equal) better?
> 
> Opinions, please.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202937

On 11/30/2018 09:22 AM, Hans wrote:
> Am Freitag, 30. November 2018, 18:14:40 CET schrieb Default User:

> When you are using a seperate home-partition you can easily install the whole
> system new - and all user specific content will be saved and will not have to
> configured by the user(s) again.
> 
> In case, you have no backup from the users......
> 
> Best
> 
> Hans


There is no need to have more than one partition for the reason you 
suggest.  For 15 years or more there is no need to format before 
install, you only need to delete system files.  You can save the files 
in users /home/user folder and do the install with no format, just use 
the same user name or change the user name to what you want before 
install. I do recommend deleting the users system files too before the 
install.

>> I often see people recommend a separate home partition.
>>
>> But why would (or not) that be better than just a home directory within the
>> root directory?
>>
>> Wouldn't one less partition be simpler, and therefore (all other things
>> being equal) better?
>>
>> Opinions, please.

I dislike top posting.
-- 
Jimmy Johnson

Debian Wheezy - KDE 4.8.4 - AMD A8-7600 - EXT4 at sda10
Registered Linux User #380263

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202939

On 2018-12-01, Jimmy Johnson <field.engineer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Opinions, please.
>
> I dislike top posting.

That isn't an opinion. This is an opinion.


-- 
He used sentences differently from any other prose writer. He always sounded
like a slightly drunk man who is very melancholy, who has no illusions about
life, who is very strong but whose strength is entirely unnecessary.
--Krasznahorkai on Krúdy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202919

Because if your root partition fails, you can reinstall and all your files are safe on their own partition...

> On 30 Nov 2018, at 17:14, Default User <hunguponcontent@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I often see people recommend a separate home partition. 
> 
> But why would (or not) that be better than just a home directory within the root directory?
> 
> Wouldn't one less partition be simpler, and therefore (all other things being equal) better?
> 
> Opinions, please.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202920

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:23:09PM +0000, Michael Thompson wrote:
>Because if your root partition fails, you can reinstall and all your files are safe on their own partition...

...leaving open the question of how likely that scenario is.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#202921

Michael Stone composed on 2018-11-30 13:58 (UTC-0500):

> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:23:09PM +0000, Michael Thompson wrote:

>>Because if your root partition fails, you can reinstall and all your files are safe on their own partition...

> ...leaving open the question of how likely that scenario is.

For hard failure, true, but there also exists soft failure, of multiple forms and causes,
particularly among those who would pose the original question, more particularly eagerly testing
the robustness of the installation.
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web