On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:57:03 -0700
Rick Moen <rick@???> wrote:

> Separate /usr is one of several measures I take to help guard against
> a variety of mishap. For one thing, it then becomes possible to
> give /usr custom mount options, including the one that makes it
> normally read-only.[1] (I have hooks to apt/dpkg to automatically
> remount as required for apt operations. See this Anthony Towns post
> for details:
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/11/msg00212.html )
>
> The aims of my partitioning strategy include getting everything
> feasible off the root filesystem to keep it small and fairly static.
> This in general terms keeps it far less likely to suffer mishap that
> includes but is not limited to hitting 100% full or getting
> filesystem damage in various ways. The rootfs having this passive
> protection against most forms of damage means that crucial tools
> needed for recovery or restore operations _or_ filesytem repair of
> other filesystems are highly likely to be available without needing
> to resort to CD/DVD images, USB key drives, or PXE-booting a recovery
> image. That's not everything, but it's certainly a great deal more
> than nothing.

What do you think of the option of having a 220G / drive, with /usr
partition taking up most of it? Does that conform to your preferred
methods, or do you want the /usr partition to come from some other
driver entirely?

By the way, what I do on my Daily Driver Desktop these days is I have a
220GB SSD for /, and leave /usr on the / partition. I use fstrim on it
every couple weeks, and so far 9% of root drive is used according to df
-h. All my data partitions are on spinning disks mounted on the SSD
/. I boot via MBR to avoid needless unpleasantries while UEFI boot
outgrows its growing pains (or doesn't). It's working very well for me
so far.


SteveT

Steve Litt
June 2017 featured book: The Key to Everyday Excellence
http://www.troubleshooters.com/key