default partition scheme without /home - why ?

[Felix Miata]

On 2008/03/10 11:31 (GMT-0500) Benjamin Kreuter apparently typed:

> On Monday 10 March 2008 12:08:18 Brendan Conoboy wrote:

>> People can always resize / later and add a /home.  Every system needs a
>> / but not every system needs a /home.  Is there a strong technical
>> reason for a default /home?  Would that same reason also apply toward a
>> separate /usr and /var and /var/tmp?  Please, lets not get nostalgic for
>> SunOS 4 partitioning!

> I can think of a good reason for a separate /home:  upgrade paths.  I know we 
> are getting better at it, but it can still be problematic if one tries to 
> install over a previous installation, and it is usually pretty smooth to just 
> format / while leaving /home intact.

Exactly. Plus, users converting from windoz are used to "needing" to
reinstall when something goes wrong. It's better PR for Linux that when they
blindly proceed to do this that Linux initially was smart enough to protect
their data from that eventuality.
-- 
"Let us not love with words or in talk only.
Let us love by what we do." 1 John 3:18 NLV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/