Q: Reason for partitioning scheme?

Markus Hitter mah at jump-ing.de
Thu Dec 13 17:59:04 UTC 2007

Am 13.12.2007 um 18:09 schrieb Kevin Fries:

> did not adopt a more protective partitioning
> scheme like this?  And more importantly, should we?

/home and the system it's self should reside in different partitions  
to make backup and system reinstallation more straightforward.

Regarding your /srv, this is unnecessary for the average desktop  
user, as you say yourself.

Why you put /var/log into it's own partition, but not /tmp and the  
remaining /var is beyond me. A more sensible sheme would put  
everything writeable into one partition and mount / read-only. This  
is possible, but not with the current layout.

I can't find an urgent need for a /boot partition either, as this is  
one of the first things a new OS will (re)install. It's even on the  
install CD, so it's easy to restore it should you ever manage to get  
rid of it.

So, my favorite for a desktop is a two partition design. One for /  
and one for /home.

If you miss a swap partition, you've read correctly. With 2 GB or  
more of physical RAM these days, there is no real need for swapping  
at all. Unfortunately, Linux doesn't support variable sized swap  
files for emergency cases (AFAIK), but my current system runs without  
any swap just fine.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter

More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list