On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 12:11, Canek Peláez Valdés <can...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Pandu Poluan <pa...@poluan.info> wrote: >> I am seriously thinking of splitting the storage of directories under /usr, >> e.g., /usr/portage and /usr/source actually living somewhere else, on >> different partition and different filesystem. Let's say something mounted on >> /mnt/Persistent. >> >> My question: should I use bindmount or symlinks to do that? What's the >> drawbacks/benefits for either? > > I'm sorry, I don't understand. What's the problem of having the > following in /etc/fstab? > > LABEL=Portage /usr/portage ext4 noatime,auto > 0 2 > LABEL=Source /usr/source ext4 noatime,auto > 0 2 > > (Replace LABEL=Portage with /dev/sda7, if you want to.) > > Why do you need to bindmount or link the directories when you can > mount them wherever you want? >
Because I am avoiding "single partition per directory". And a slight mistake in my original email, it's not just /usr but also /var (and other root-based directories that will not interfere with boot-up / operations) Let me give an example: Let's say I have /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd, both having single partition each (/dev/sdc1 and /dev/sdd1). /dev/sdc1 will be formatted reiserfs mounted into /mnt/Persistent1 /dev/sdd1 will be formatted ext4 mounted into /mnt/Persistent2 Directories not really necessary for daily operations, such as /usr/src, /usr/portage, /var/db/pkg, and so on and so forth, will each be a subdir under either /mnt/Persistent1 or /mnt/Persistent2 according to each directory's nature. Let's take the example of /usr/src ... I can either make /usr/src a symlink to /mnt/Persistent1/src, or bindmount /mnt/Persistent1/src to /usr/src What will be the benefits/drawbacks for bindmount vs symlink? Rgds, -- FdS Pandu E Poluan ~ IT Optimizer ~ • LOPSA Member #15248 • Blog : http://pepoluan.tumblr.com • Linked-In : http://id.linkedin.com/in/pepoluan
