On 03/30/2016 07:15 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
With Win 95 I typically used a different partition for the Documents folder. Suprisingly, it is not that simple to do with current versions; aparently, you have to do it for each user.
I recall advocating this at various clients for their IT people to do and, yes, it was not as easy as with *NIX and yes it had to be done for each user. Later, when Microsoft supported corporate (aka "pro"?) versions and Windows Server (though some clients preferred SAMBA on BigIron UNIX for transparency and reliability and scalability [as well as cost effectiveness]) there were ... what was it called, "roaming shares", so people cold do what we always did with SUN workstations back in the early 1980s, and log in from anywhere and get our "home" mounted (using NFS) on the particular workstation we were using.
Also interestingly, other Linux distros don't do a separate /home folder, so apparently there are reasons both ways.
There's sense in that if you are using BtrFS (or similar) since there are optimizations that make more sense in one big unified file system. There's also the logic that trying to work out provisioning between what should be the ROOTFS and what should be the HomeFS is a bit crazy. We've seen the idea that an installer might try to make a 10G ROOTFS on a 2T drive and leave the rest for /home! In that world simply saying make the whole 2T a BtrFS and have done with it is quite logical. Current BtrFS, I'm finding, is reliable enough for that. If I were running spare hardware enough I'd give that a try, but I don't have the time (or inclination) to adequately exercise such an installation. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org