On Monday 03 April 2006 10:03, Paul Howarth wrote:
>Gene Heskett wrote:
>> And add one more.
>>
>> 4) Since when is it illegal to have a seperate root partition? DD
>> forced me to make root a directory on /, and I've never run that way
>> in 8 years. I'll bruteforce it because the partition is there,
>> without a label since DD wouldn't let me use it, IF there is no good
>> reason for changing to a dir on / in the first place.
>
>Presumably you mean a "/root partition" rather than a "root partition"
>(which I'd read as being for "/")?
>
>I guess it's for similar reasons to ensuring that /etc lives on the
> root partition, to ensure that root's environment is present and sane
> when no other partitions are mounted (e.g. in single user mode).
>
>Paul.
I was under the impression (and no idea where I heard/read that now)
that any partitions marked 0 0 on the end of the fstab line were
mounted in 'single' mode. Is this not the case? I haven't used single
with this FC2 install ever, no need to so far, so I don't know, but
I'll find out the next time I reboot to it.
However...
>From the /etc/rc1.d/S00single file:
# rc.single This file is executed by init when it goes into runlevel
# 1, which is the administrative state. It kills all
# deamons and then puts the system into single user mode.
# Note that the file systems are kept mounted.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Now as to whether this is true for a 'linux single' boot, or just for
the case where one does a 'telinit 1' from a shell in runlevel 3, I
haven't tried.
All this is of course from the FC2 install. NDI what FC5 does WRTT.
--
Cheers, Gene
People having trouble with vz bouncing email to me should add the word
'online' between the 'verizon', and the dot which bypasses vz's
stupid bounce rules. I do use spamassassin too. :-)
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2006 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
