Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 7 Jul 2010 03:10:02 +0100
From:      RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: /boot is full after running "make installkernel" on FreeBSD 8.0
Message-ID:  <20100707031002.2fb9421b@gumby.homeunix.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C2E059D.7050106@qeng-ho.org>
References:  <AANLkTil7rb8_YNbGPfwsNt1_Zn4hdOr9hTpGwVwTEbrF@mail.gmail.com> <20100701212112.GA28138@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> <AANLkTinLgvd9GLP8RXeiWcowBoFxSeZSJLMHjCFq8jGR@mail.gmail.com> <4C2D9659.3060208@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20100702131315.00007c89@unknown> <4C2DF1DA.2020503@qeng-ho.org> <20100702153814.00000aa2@unknown> <4C2E059D.7050106@qeng-ho.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 16:28:29 +0100
Arthur Chance <freebsd@qeng-ho.org> wrote:

> I suspect whoever you were talking to probably has more of a clue
> than I do. As a quick data point, I just ran "portsnap fetch update"
> while another process did a "df /var; sleep 1" loop and /var
> increased by about 30MB at its peak. That was a week after the last
> port update. I've no idea how much space a "portsnap fetch extract"
> would take and would rather not do one right now. 

The temporary space is likely used by the "fetch" stage for
downloaded patch files. I don't think "update" or "extract" use much
storage on /var.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100707031002.2fb9421b>