Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 09:06:07 +0100 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: Manolis Kiagias <sonicy@otenet.gr> Cc: Roger <rnodal@gmail.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Remote re-installation of current FreeBSD system. Message-ID: <20091114090607.7188c8d2.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <4AFE612B.6060501@otenet.gr> References: <9d972bed0911131228k36f9515ak361d82d766c24749@mail.gmail.com> <20091114083958.74482be3.freebsd@edvax.de> <4AFE612B.6060501@otenet.gr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 09:50:03 +0200, Manolis Kiagias <sonicy@otenet.gr> wrote: > It seems however that some dedicated servers are setup using a single > slice and a single partition, i.e. having /usr /var and /tmp as > subdirectories in / instead of separate filesystems. Well, that's no problem per se, and it saves some "partition out of space" trouble when using UFS partitioning. You don't have this with ZFS. :-) Anyway, FreeBSD should keep all its partitions within one slice, or do I fail to see some hidden advantage of distributing the system into several slices? > If the OP cares to share his /etc/fstab, it will become obvious if this > is the case. That would answer this question. > If there are already separate partitions inside the slice, I'd agree > there is no compelling reason to move to a multiple slice system. An idea would be, for example, to remove the /usr partition and create two new partitions, one for /usr and one for /usr/local, which would move out /usr/local contents from the partition holding /usr - which I think is what the OP originally intended. This could be done relatively easily (in regards of SSH for the command connection). -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091114090607.7188c8d2.freebsd>