Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 02:25:32 -0400 From: "C. Michailidis" <dinom@balstonresearch.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sysinstall automatic filesystem size generation. Message-ID: <200508290225.32394.dinom@balstonresearch.com> In-Reply-To: <20050829035729.GH88693@dan.emsphone.com> References: <200508282330.09302.dinom@balstonresearch.com> <20050829035729.GH88693@dan.emsphone.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday 28 August 2005 11:57 pm, you wrote: > For anything over a 9gb disk, I just make one big / partition. If you > sub partition, you'll always end up filling one (either /var or /tmp > quickly or /usr eventually) and wish you had picked different sizes. >=20 This is a very straight-forward way of doing things. Do you really think t= hat sysinstall should use a similar method when it attempts to auto-configu= re a slice? =46rom what I understand there are quite valid reasons why you would want a= seperate /, /var, /tmp, and /usr. For some reason I recall being informed= that more critical filesystems should reside closer to the beginning of th= e disk. I'm not too sure why, maybe someone would care to explain why it isn't the = best practice to have a single monster /? I have simply come to accept thi= s as fact and wouldn't mind a refresher myself. =2DDino *************************** Maude Lebowski: What do you do for recreation? The Dude: Oh, the usual. I bowl. Drive around. The occasional acid flashbac= k.=20
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200508290225.32394.dinom>