Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 09:38:12 -0500 From: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> To: Peter Jeremy <PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au> Cc: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: /usr/portsnap vs. /var/db/portsnap Message-ID: <20050806143812.GA76296@over-yonder.net> In-Reply-To: <20050806112118.GA7708@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> References: <42F47C0D.2020704@freebsd.org> <20050806112118.GA7708@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 09:21:18PM +1000 I heard the voice of Peter Jeremy, and lo! it spake thus: > > I think it would be nicer to have it in /var. I suspect that that > many inodes may present problems for some people whereever you put > it. I doubt it presents much problem as regards the 'running out' issue anyway. Things like fsck time, maybe. But I've got a rather oldish and rather smallish /var, and: Filesystem Size Used Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on /dev/da1s1f 992M 266M 647M 29% 3802 250148 1% /var 13k inodes wouldn't faze it. -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fullermd@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050806143812.GA76296>