--On Saturday, February 13, 2016 03:24:53 PM -0500 David Both
wrote:
However, Devin, the answer to your question [...]
For the record, I didn't ask the question; I only posted the original
heads-up. That was Tim Murphy asking the question. Watch the
On 02/15/2016 02:12 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
It is so great to hear that! I was shushed a few times by modern
experts - I bet on this list too - about following ancient practices
and having more than just / partition... so I felt myself as a relic
dinosaur
...
On a public-facing server I
On 02/13/2016 03:50 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
I still like making /home its own file system, and if I'm running a
substantial (non-trivial) database server, it also has its own volume,
quite likely on its own raid.
I've done this for close to 20 years (19 years this April, to be
exact); my
On 02/13/2016 04:19 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Sat, February 13, 2016 2:24 pm, David Both wrote:
+1 Valeri. I agree that things have changed a lot!
_things_ changed? I wouldn't quite agree. It is people who have changed
definitely.
'Things have changed' is idiomatic English for the passive
On Mon, February 15, 2016 1:00 pm, Ricardo J. Barberis wrote:
> El Sábado 13/02/2016, Valeri Galtsev escribió:
>> On Sat, February 13, 2016 2:50 pm, John R Pierce wrote:
>> > On 2/13/2016 12:19 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>> >> It is interesting to observe how perceptions are changing over time.
>>
El Sábado 13/02/2016, Valeri Galtsev escribió:
> On Sat, February 13, 2016 2:50 pm, John R Pierce wrote:
> > On 2/13/2016 12:19 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> >> It is interesting to observe how perceptions are changing over time.
> >> Decade or two ago we were partitioning small then drives (thus
Devin Reade wrote:
> I have a CentOS 6 machine that was initially installed as CentOS 6.4
> in May of 2013. It's /boot filesystem is 200M which, IIRC, was the
> default /boot size at the time.
As a matter of interest, is there any advantage today
in having a /boot partition?
I thought it went
On 02/13/2016 05:57 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Devin Reade wrote:
I have a CentOS 6 machine that was initially installed as CentOS 6.4
in May of 2013. It's /boot filesystem is 200M which, IIRC, was the
default /boot size at the time.
As a matter of interest, is there any advantage today
in
On Sat, February 13, 2016 5:57 am, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Devin Reade wrote:
>
>> I have a CentOS 6 machine that was initially installed as CentOS 6.4
>> in May of 2013. It's /boot filesystem is 200M which, IIRC, was the
>> default /boot size at the time.
>
> As a matter of interest, is there
+1 Valeri. I agree that things have changed a lot!
However, Devin, the answer to your question is that the /boot partition
is a necessity in a LVM environment, which everything else is by
default. The /boot partition cannot be a logical volume; it must be a
raw disk partition with an EXT[34]
On 2/13/2016 12:19 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
It is interesting to observe how perceptions are changing over time.
Decade or two ago we were partitioning small then drives (thus loosing
some of the space) just to separate regular users from those places vital
for secure and reliable running of
On Sat, February 13, 2016 2:24 pm, David Both wrote:
> +1 Valeri. I agree that things have changed a lot!
_things_ changed? I wouldn't quite agree. It is people who have changed
definitely. As far as things are concerned, they have changed a lot, but
not fundamentally. Disks are huge, but they
On Sat, February 13, 2016 2:50 pm, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 2/13/2016 12:19 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>> It is interesting to observe how perceptions are changing over time.
>> Decade or two ago we were partitioning small then drives (thus loosing
>> some of the space) just to separate regular
On Sat, 2016-02-13 at 15:19 -0600, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> _things_ changed? I wouldn't quite agree. It is people who have changed
> definitely. As far as things are concerned, they have changed a lot, but
> not fundamentally. Disks are huge, but they still are not infinite. Number
> of inodes
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Devin Reade wrote:
> I have a CentOS 6 machine that was initially installed as CentOS 6.4
> in May of 2013. It's /boot filesystem is 200M which, IIRC, was the
> default /boot size at the time.
>
Hmm, for some reason I decided on ~500MB /boot on
Hello,
I always used 500~512 with yum configured for clean kernels installation =
2.
Best regards,
El dia 11/02/2016 8:25 p. m., va escriure:
> Chris Murphy wrote:
> > Default boot volume on Fedora is 500M, with a kernel installonly_limit
> > of 3. So far this seems
Default boot volume on Fedora is 500M, with a kernel installonly_limit
of 3. So far this seems sufficient, even accounting for the "rescue
kernel" (which is really a nohostonly initramfs, which is quite a bit
larger than the standard hostonly initramfs used for numbered
kernels).
Chris Murphy wrote:
> Default boot volume on Fedora is 500M, with a kernel installonly_limit
> of 3. So far this seems sufficient, even accounting for the "rescue
> kernel" (which is really a nohostonly initramfs, which is quite a bit
> larger than the standard hostonly initramfs used for numbered
I have a CentOS 6 machine that was initially installed as CentOS 6.4
in May of 2013. It's /boot filesystem is 200M which, IIRC, was the
default /boot size at the time.
The most recent kernel update (2.6.32-573.18.1.el6) fails because of
lack of space in /boot. The workaround is edit
Devin Reade wrote:
> I have a CentOS 6 machine that was initially installed as CentOS 6.4
> in May of 2013. It's /boot filesystem is 200M which, IIRC, was the
> default /boot size at the time.
>
> The most recent kernel update (2.6.32-573.18.1.el6) fails because of
> lack of space in /boot. The
20 matches
Mail list logo