Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:00:22 -0500 (EST)
From:      Jerry McAllister <jerrymc@clunix.cl.msu.edu>
To:        keramida@ceid.upatras.gr (Giorgos Keramidas)
Cc:        Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, gs_stoller@juno.com
Subject:   Re: New Computer System
Message-ID:  <200602241500.k1OF0MRc010424@clunix.cl.msu.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20060224115221.GA1411@flame.pc>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 
> On 2006-02-24 00:56, Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> wrote:
> > Jerry McAllister writes:
> >>  For those reasons, I generally make the following partitions.
> >>
> >>  partition  Mount     size      comments
> >>    a     =  / (root)  128MB
> >
> > May I ask what OS version you're running?  Because on my -CURRENT
> > system:
> >
> > huff@>> du /boot | sort -nr
> > 151838  /boot
> > 66596   /boot/kernel.old
> > 66526   /boot/kernel
> > 17810   /boot/kernel.generic
> > 20      /boot/defaults
> > 2       /boot/modules
> > 2       /boot/firmware
> 

On my machine running FreeBSD 6.0  df -k  shows this: 

>     # df -k /
>     Filesystem    1K-blocks  Used   Avail  Capacity  Mounted on
>     /dev/da0s4a    126702    56206  60360    48%      /
>     #

Doing a 'du /boot' gets me:
   18       /boot/defaults
   43026    /boot/kernel
   2        /boot/modules
   43614    /boot

This is for a machine to use and not tinker with so it does not
have extra kernels and such sitting around. 

Remember also that /tmp is its own partition and doesn't use any space 
in root and /var and /usr are all in their own partitions and not 
taking up space in root.

> CURRENT usually has larger binaries, because of all the extra debugging
> information that is customarily enabled in the kernel.  

Good point.

>                        On an amd64
> system here, the root partition uses even more disk space:
> 
>     # df -m /
>     Filesystem  1M-blocks  Used Avail Capacity  Mounted on
>     /dev/ad0s2a      1583   285  1171    20%    /
>     #
> 
> > Su unless I'm doing sonething that causes bloat, 128mb will be
> > woefully inadwquate.
> 
> Possibly.  I'd certainly go for a larger root partition than 128 MB, but
> Jerry has done a great work outlining his partition scheme and why he
> choose those sizes.  

Thanks for the positive comment.

True, if I was using that machine for development work, I would probably
increase both root and /usr by at least 50% if not more or else move
that /usr/src as well as /usr/ports over to the big /home or /work
file systems (which I do on another development machine, but it is
running an ancient 4.xxx FreeBSD at the moment :( ).

>           The general idea here is that there isn't an easy
> way to find the One True Partitioning Scheme(TM) -- one that will match
> everyone's needs for now and all eternity.

That is for sure.   Running services for many users or many virtual
hosts or a number of jails or doing development or a huge database or 
mainly playing games or many other things all make big differences in 
how you divide your disk as well as what 3rd party software you install.

////jerry

> The original poster should spend some time thinking about what the
> system will be used for.  Then the mechanics of using fdisk(8) and
> disklabel(8) or bsdlabel(8) are an eays thing to explain :)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200602241500.k1OF0MRc010424>