On Tue, 2002-01-15 at 12:05, John J. Trammell wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:12:00AM -0600, Phil Mendelsohn wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 09:18:43AM -0600, John J. Trammell wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 10:56:02AM -0600, Joel Rosenberg wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2002-01-14 at 09:59, John J. Trammell wrote: > > > > > [snip] > > > > > Another good reason I haven't seen yet is that if say /home/ > > > > > has its own partition, a user app going nuts and filling up > > > > > the partition won't trash the machine. Nice segmentation there. > > > > > > > > > Don't disk quotas do a better job of that? > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps in /home, but another poster mentioned /var... > > > > OK -- but from a security standpoint, no one that isn't capable of > > fixing the system should be allowed to write in such a way that they > > can crash the system. Actually, no user should be allowed to do > > *anything* they can't fix, but we have to be careful starting down > > that path. > > > > Either way, you are correct from a pragmatic point of view (I'd > > say), but from an idealistic point of view, one could argue that > > *every* user (even daemons and root) should have quotas, disk space > > being finite. > > > > Good, because I'm a pragmatist. :-) > > The thought of sitting down to work out new disk quotas every time I > add a user gives me the willies. It is far less work for me in my > current position to just partition. > > -- I'm fairly sure that that process can and should be automated, if you're going to be doing it at all often. -- ------------------------------------- There's a widow in sleepy Chester Who weeps for her only son; There's a grave on the Pabeng River, A grave that the Burmans shun, And there's Subadar Prag Tewarri Who tells how the work was done. -------------------------------------