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. -- "Trying to do something with your life is like sitting down to eat a moose." --Douglas Wood