Jun 112023
 

Ah yes! The eternal debate on how to do storage under Linux (and previously Unix). This debate has been going on since Unix found itself with some disks.

No, but …

First of all, in the simplest case of installing Linux onto a machine with a single disk isn’t the only possibility here. If you are in that situation, you do need to consider a separate partition for the /home file system.

But there are all sorts of other possibilities here – for example my own workstation has a separate /home file system but it comes from another (ZFS) storage pool of disks. So my system disk doesn’t have a separate partition for /home. If you are using extra disks you’ll almost always want a separate /home file system.

But before we get too deep into the technical terms, what exactly are they?

  1. When setting up a new disk, you can divide it up into 1 or more partitions which to the operating system look pretty much like disks – you can use nvme0n1 to create a file system, or you can use nvme0n1p1. On a system disk you will very often have three or more – one each for /boot, /boot/efi, and / (at the least).
  2. Once Linux has taken over a disk and “formatted” it for its use, it has a data structure on it that makes it a file system of one type or another. This file system can be mounted at any point in the hierarchy, so historically (when we had much smaller disks), there could be file systems mounted at /, /usr, /var, /var/spool, /usr/local, etc.

So do we need a separate /home file system? Of course not, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a wise thing to do.

If you’re setting up a throw-away laptop that won’t ever store anything important, then sure a separate /home file system is probably a waste of time – it’ll probably only ever store some configuration files. If the system you’re setting up is your main machine and /home contains all your files – past, present, and future, then a separate /home file system is worth considering.

  1. If you ever re-install the operating system, your separate /home could be preserved so that you don’t have to restore from backup. That isn’t safe (so you should always have a backup elsewhere) but it can be done fairly easily (with enough practice).
  2. If you upgrade your storage, a separate /home file system can be quicker and safer to copy (at the file system level) to the new storage. Doing it on a file-by-file basis (such as with the excellent rsync) is likely to be very much slower than doing it at the file system level (such as with zfs send).
  3. It should be a great deal easier to take important backups if all the important files are on one file system.
Peering At Each Other
Apr 012023
 

There has recently been some controversy regarding a certain football celebrity comparing current events – in particular the treatment of refugees looking to claim asylum – with the events in Germany in the 1930s. The first was just silly – suspending the celebrity for saying something that had nothing to do with his professional life.

The second is more serious and were objections from Jews comparing current events to the Holocaust. They certainly have a point – too many relatively trivial things get compared to the Holocaust. But in this case, they’re wrong.

First of all no mention was made of the Holocaust which strictly speaking began in 1942 with the enactment of the Final Solution (although many Jews were killed when Poland was invaded).

Secondly it specifically compared current events with events in 1930s Germany; not saying they are the same, but have certain similarities. Warning us that those who would daemonize certain groups – Socialist, Communists, Roma, and Jews in the case of 1930s Germany, Refugees (and Roma) in the case of the UK today – can become dangerous if ignored.

If the UK is sliding into fascism, warning about those signs indicating the slide is not only the responsible thing to do, but the thing every sensible person should be shouting about. And it is indeed the case.

And silencing such warnings with sensitivity about the Holocaust is very very wrong.

Tunnel of Arches
Feb 162023
 

One of the things that keep cropping up whenever vegan food crops up in social media, is why does it always resemble meat? Or “faux meat” as I call it.

It doesn’t.

As a vegetarian of over 30 years (and thus aligned with vegans; even if I’m not a “good vegan”), I very rarely eat faux meat; and when I do it’s out of curiosity. Not to see how closely they resemble meat, but to see if they were a viable choice.

V* (meaning vegetarian and vegan) food doesn’t need a meat substitute. There’s plenty of fine choices out there that don’t miss the rotting corpses a bit.

So where does this belief come from? There’s three possible reasons why faux meat choices exist :-

  1. New v*s miss certain meat dishes and seek faux meat to fill the gap in their diet. Fair enough.
  2. Meat eaters who for one reason or another seek to swap out meat for a meat-free alternative. Fair enough.
  3. Companies who market these products as being what v*s actually want. Whether they’re right or not kind of depends on how large groups 1&2 are.
Ducks swimming on water in a line.
Ducks In A Row
Feb 132023
 

(‘bad’ language ahead)

Bollocks.

Reducing the speed limit from 30mph to 20mph reduces the fatality of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist from 40% to 5%. Slower speeds are fundamentally safer on crowded urban roads, and small country lanes – everyone has more time to react and even in the worst case where a collision occurs, the accident is more survivable.

There are those who claim the lower speeds will slow them down – tough! That continually looking at the speedometer is more dangerous – get used to lower speeds. All of the excuses I have seen amount to selfishness.

And similarly the opposition to prioritising vulnerable road users – letting pedestrians cross at junctions, giving cyclists at least 1.5m of space when overtaking, etc. all amount to motorists’ entitlement. You aren’t more important, you don’t pay for the roads, and the safety of cyclists and pedestrians takes priority to your convenience.

Who Are You Looking At?
Feb 092023
 

No.

There is something that certain entitled motorists keep banging on about – “road tax”. There hasn’t been a road tax since 1937; it’s currently called vehicle excise duty and the income (£8 billion) goes into the general taxation fund. It sounds like a lot, but is just a drop in the overall public spending budget. And it isn’t reserved for spending on roads.

And local roads are mostly paid for out of council tax – in other words the roads that cyclists and pedestrians actually use are paid for out of local taxes.

Which has an interesting side effect – a motorist on a local road is likely to be a local road user, but a significant proportion will be visitors. Meaning that they haven’t paid for the road. Whereas a cyclist or a pedestrian is more likely to be a local.

Meaning that on any road that isn’t a motorway, the cyclists and pedestrians pay more for that road than the motorist.

Posts leading out to the sea.
Into The Water; Stillness and Motion