James Knott said the following on 08/09/2012 09:49 AM:
Anton Aylward wrote:
Andreas Jaeger said the following on 08/09/2012 07:59 AM:
On the other hand, going forward I suggest to not setup a separate /usr anymore, there's no benefit in it. Backups? More to the point, management of backups.
Oh, right, you've got some Sony DAT tape thing that can take half a terabyte and a budget for an endless supply of tapes ...
Unlike many of us ...
Is there really any need to back up /usr, unless you want a full "bare metal" restore? Of course, there's no reason why you can't back up individual subdirectories if needed.
I've met many managers/sysadmins who *DO* want to do full 'bare metal' restores, usually in the belief that its fast and has a lower impact on operations. They were all proven wrong because the normal business processes required other backup/restore strategies such as of a project or project specific database (which happened to be on a raw partition). As it happens I do a lot of work in scripting languages, Ruby, Perl, and update the libraries under /usr/lib. For me its worth having mountable partitions for those so I can 'wipe' the basic /usr and hence /usr/lib but retail my enhancements. -- IOException: Jovian moons misaligned. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org