Re: [cobalt-users] Symbolic link for /usr directory

[flash22@xxxxxxx]

On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Revd leonard payne wrote:

> on 6/6/01 10:10 pm, Johan Pretorius at johan@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > This is all about claiming back space from the root filesystem ...
> > 
> >> One option is to copy the /usr directory to /home/usr, and create a
> >> link such as /usr -> /home/usr.  Is there any reason why one should *not*
> <snip>
> Well with all due respect to Sun/Cobalt, never have I come across
> such a piece of PYA in my life.
> 
> Quote
> >>>One possible problem I can think of might be
> >>>some binary files have special permissions that may not be carried through on
> >>>symlinks.
> Unquote
> 
> What precisely? If I  mv all of /usr across to /home/usr - why would
> permissions not be carried across.
> 
> The truth is that at Basic Level Support, the safest for Sun Cobalt to say
> is NO - However if you want to pay for Professional Services, it can be done
> 
> Sheesh
> 
> Unless anyone can some up with a good - proven - reason why not
> then I would go for it.

lol..well, don't discount the possability they are trying to keep the
unwary from shootingtheirselvesinthefoot....

I think the permission concern is su, which is suid and would be ever so
slightly less secure on /usr via a symlink , if you get the symlink wrong
you get porked....

On the other hand , there is no good reason why usr couldn't be a seperate
partition, had someone wanted to set it up that way...

Filesystem           1k-blocks      Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda1               258765    130323    115077  53% /
/dev/hdb1               390317    358179     32138  92% /usr
/dev/hdb2               634239    593724     40515  94% /home
[pathetic old machine i use to test sql]

Using a symlink to do the same thing *should* be possible, but who wants
to hold the fellow's hand when he hoses the filesystem by accident ;0

gsh