IMHO you could just use the rest of the disk (after the /boot [hda1]
and swap [hda2]), but if you intend to get a /home (or anything), I
usually use 10GB for / just in case (still at 50%, but you never
know). I got two 40GB disks however, if I were you (and I'm not, so,
you can just
joaoemanuel1981 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do i not understand why needs swap, if have 1GB of RAM?
1. because if you have 200GB disk, cutting 1 or 2GB for swap does not matter
2. because someone told me some apps want to allocate swap no matter how ram
you have (I think it was someone from hp-ux
There are too damn many myths about swap out there. Like this one: Always
configure twice as much swap as you have ram. Why? Why would I need more swap
if I increased my ram? You need at least a little bit of swap for peak memory
usage. Let's look at real numbers. Say, I am a bit low of ram
Uwe Thiem wrote:
3. because it is always better to have too much ram/swap then too little
Nnnnot always. There are circumstances when you do not want swap at all.
This is never true. Swap is *always* called for, and for a good reason.
Your example of having a real-time responsive app
On Thursday 23 February 2006 19:25, Uwe Thiem wrote:
End of rant.
I think you should read this article
http://rudd-o.com/archives/2006/01/11/why-swap-is-good-even-with-tons-of-ram/
I don't know about you but since I started using an archck kernel, I have
always seen my system actually using
On 2/23/06, Dave Nebinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is never true. Swap is *always* called for, and for a good reason.
No, it isn't. For my single-user laptop with 2G of RAM, I actually
prefer that the OOM kill any runaway process that is gobbling up RAM.
My laptop disk (even at 7200rpm)
Dave Nebinger wrote:
You've got
2gb ram, yet you still need swap for hibernation.
No, he doesn't. suspend2 could also write the memory to a
file when hibernating.
That said, I'd find it rather useless to write to a plain
normal file, as you need to keep the space available anyway.
And with
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:46:57 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
If partition A
runs out of space while partition B has plenty,
Then you made B too large, which is the main cause of the problem.
Of course, but if your needs change, that's the situation you find
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 19:59:44 -0600, Zac Slade wrote:
But far more chance of running out of space on /usr, /var or /opt
while one of the others has plenty free. I prefer to have these three
on the same partition for a desktop, but separate from /. I use the
bind option to mount /var and
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 08:52:17 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Then you made B too large, which is the main cause of the problem.
Of course, but if your needs change, that's the situation you find
yourself in, as I did recently.
Yes, this might happen. How often does it, though?
Twice
On Friday 17 February 2006 07:33, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:40, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 17:18, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16
On 2/17/06, Hemmann, Volker Armin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 17 February 2006 07:33, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:40, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 17:18, Alexander Skwar
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Friday 17 February 2006 07:33, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:40, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 17:18, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin
Richard Fish wrote:
On 2/17/06, Hemmann, Volker Armin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 17 February 2006 07:33, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:40, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006
Alexander Skwar wrote:
Richard Fish wrote:
Are you two done with your pissing match yet?
Sure. As soon as that moron stops pissing at me, I'll
also stop.
You lost. If you're so clever, you should stop first.
Benno
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Take it to an IRC chat or whatever where the both of you can keep
going with this pointless and obviously selfish discussion that is not
even close to the OP question and had been discussed a lot over the
net, being one of those things where you think you're right and use
it, and somebody else
Okay, can we stop with the flamefest, already ?
Comments below...
Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:40, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 17:18, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
Maarten wrote:
Okay, can we stop with the flamefest, already ?
Certainly.
Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:40, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 17:18, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker
First, I can't really understand why either one of you two won't fully
explain your reasonings when going against the other. It helps noone.
On 2006-02-17 19:04, Hemmann, Volker Armin uttered these thoughts:
On Friday 17 February 2006 07:33, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Friday 17 February 2006 19:38, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Richard Fish wrote:
On 2/17/06, Hemmann, Volker Armin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Friday 17 February 2006 07:33, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:40, Alexander Skwar wrote:
@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] How many GB for / partition?
First, I can't really understand why either one of you two won't fully
explain your reasonings when going against the other. It helps noone.
On 2006-02-17 19:04, Hemmann, Volker Armin uttered these thoughts
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 22:35 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Maarten wrote:
Okay, can we stop with the flamefest, already ?
Certainly.
Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:40, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 22:35:48 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Okay, can we stop with the flamefest, already ?
Certainly.
[snip]
Yep, but you have to find those places. If you cannot execute
programs, that will be hard. With /tmp, an attacker knows
that he can write there.
OK, a better
I'm installing Gentoo and I'd like you to suggest me how much disc space I should use for /.
My machine is Pentium4, 1GB RAM, 200 GB HD ATA
It's a desktop machine with Gentoo as the only and exclusive OS.
Will run KDE. Amarok, OpenOffice, firefox
Thanx!
40 GB is enough, these are my stats with / partition of 35GB / 200GB
Filesystemblocchi di 1K Usati Disponib. Uso% Montato su
*
/dev/sdb1 34185192 18272204 15912988 54% /
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 13:19:21 +0100, Izar Ilun wrote:
I'm installing Gentoo and I'd like you to suggest me how much disc
space I should use for /.
That depends on what you are going to put on it. Will /usr or /var be on
it? They use most of the space. 10GB will be plenty. I have / or a 300MB
I say that, It'll be just:
- /boot
- swap
- /home
- / (all the rest)On 2/16/06, Ibai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It'll be just:
- /boot
- swap
- /home
- / (all the rest)On 2/16/06, Neil Bothwick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 13:19:21 +0100, Izar Ilun wrote: I'm installing Gentoo
Izar Ilun wrote:
I'm installing Gentoo and I'd like you to suggest me how much disc space
I should use for /.
512 MB.
The rest should go to filesystems for /var, /usr,
/opt and /home. And maybe also additional filesystems
for /usr/src and all that Gentoo stuff.
Alexander Skwar
--
BOFH Excuse
Izar Ilun wrote:
I say that, It'll be just:
- /boot
- swap
- /home
- / (all the rest)
That's not advisable. I'd strongly suggest to create
filesystems for /boot, swap, /home, /opt, /usr, /var
and / (of course). This way you're more flexible
and also a bit safer (not such a high risk of
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 14:06:12 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
That's not advisable. I'd strongly suggest to create
filesystems for /boot, swap, /home, /opt, /usr, /var
and / (of course). This way you're more flexible
and also a bit safer (not such a high risk of running
out of space on /).
But
I'm installing Gentoo and I'd like you to suggest me how much disc space
I should use for /.
512 MB.
The rest should go to filesystems for /var, /usr,
/opt and /home. And maybe also additional filesystems
fo
This is (part) what i have mount
i`ve instales stuff for workstation (no
On Thursday 16 February 2006 14:06, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Izar Ilun wrote:
I say that, It'll be just:
- /boot
- swap
- /home
- / (all the rest)
That's not advisable. I'd strongly suggest to create
filesystems for /boot, swap, /home, /opt, /usr, /var
and / (of course). This way
On Thursday 16 February 2006 13:19, Izar Ilun wrote:
I'm installing Gentoo and I'd like you to suggest me how much disc space I
should use for /.
My machine is Pentium4, 1GB RAM, 200 GB HD ATA
It's a desktop machine with Gentoo as the only and exclusive OS.
Will run KDE. Amarok,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm installing Gentoo and I'd like you to suggest me how much disc space
I should use for /.
512 MB.
The rest should go to filesystems for /var, /usr,
/opt and /home. And maybe also additional filesystems
fo
This is (part) what i have mount
i`ve instales
Hemmann, Volker Armin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To put everything on its own partition was good, when harddisks were
2gb-10gb big. But today it is just a waste of space and time.
IMHO there still might be advantages to using more partitions,
for example security (you can mount /boot /tmp /home
Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I say that, It'll be just:
- /boot
- swap
- /home
- / (all the rest)
That's not advisable. I'd strongly suggest to create
filesystems for /boot, swap, /home, /opt, /usr, /var
and / (of course).
Moreover I have created separate partitions
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 14:06, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Izar Ilun wrote:
I say that, It'll be just:
- /boot
- swap
- /home
- / (all the rest)
That's not advisable. I'd strongly suggest to create
filesystems for /boot, swap, /home, /opt, /usr, /var
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 14:06:12 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
That's not advisable. I'd strongly suggest to create
filesystems for /boot, swap, /home, /opt, /usr, /var
and / (of course). This way you're more flexible
and also a bit safer (not such a high risk of running
Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hm, as I said before - have a look at LVM. It makes
life *SO* much easier. I don't quite get, why people
still do the old style partitioning.
For example, in your setup, how do you make /var larger, if need
be?
With LVM, it would just be a matter of lvresize -L+512m
On 2/16/06, Hemmann, Volker Armin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on their own partition. Additionally, the more partitions, the more useless
head movement, the slower data transfer the earlier the harddisk dies.
I disagree. Sensible partitioning can _reduce_ head movement and
improve performance.
Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hm, as I said before - have a look at LVM. It makes
life *SO* much easier. I don't quite get, why people
still do the old style partitioning.
Correct me if I am wrong, but with lvm you do not have
control over physical placement of your partitions.
On 2/16/06 9:04 AM, Martin Eisenhardt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hm, as I said before - have a look at LVM. It makes
life *SO* much easier. I don't quite get, why people
still do the old style partitioning.
For example, in your setup, how do you make /var larger, if
On Thursday February 16 2006 16:10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hm, as I said before - have a look at LVM. It makes
life *SO* much easier. I don't quite get, why people
still do the old style partitioning.
Correct me if I am wrong, but with lvm you do
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hm, as I said before - have a look at LVM. It makes
life *SO* much easier. I don't quite get, why people
still do the old style partitioning.
Correct me if I am wrong, but with lvm you do not have
control over physical
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
you'll never fill up root, so making a lot of partitions is just wasted space.
No, it's not wasted space. Well, okay, not much wasted space.
And yes, I once put all and everything on its own partition.
I learnt the hard way, that this does not solve problems, it
On Thursday 16 February 2006 16:14, Robert Crawford wrote:
The main reason for putting /var, /tmp, and portage on their own
partitions is to minimize fragmentation on /, especially with a source
distro like Gentoo. And yes, Linux does fragment and does require
attention, especially with
On Thursday 16 February 2006 15:45, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 14:06, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Izar Ilun wrote:
I say that, It'll be just:
- /boot
- swap
- /home
- / (all the rest)
That's not advisable. I'd strongly
On Thursday 16 February 2006 16:02, Richard Fish wrote:
Having / on its own partition can result in a similar improvement,
because the drive doesn't have to seek over your files in /home or
/opt to get to something in /lib.
it still has to move at the beginning of the partition, look up, where
On 2/16/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong, but with lvm you do not have
control over physical placement of your partitions. Right?
While true in theory, in practice the first LV you create is created
at the lowest numbered PV extents, which correspond to
On Thursday February 16 2006 16:30, Alexander Skwar wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hm, as I said before - have a look at LVM. It makes
life *SO* much easier. I don't quite get, why people
still do the old style partitioning.
Correct me if I am
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:39:02 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
But far more chance of running out of space on /usr, /var or /opt
while
Not really. And even if so - who cares? Make the
fs larger, and you're set. Also, if those fs
run out of space, it's not a DoS.
No, but it means you have to
Martin Eisenhardt wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong, but with lvm you do not have
control over physical placement of your partitions. Right?
No, wrong, I am sorry :-D
You might let LVM choose where to put the extends for a newly created logical
volume, but you might also tell LVM where to
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:39:02 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
But far more chance of running out of space on /usr, /var or /opt
while
Not really. And even if so - who cares? Make the
fs larger, and you're set. Also, if those fs
run out of space, it's not a DoS.
No,
Alexander Skwar wrote:
I can't. But that's just not needed. Make the filesystems
as large as they *now* need to be. If more space is required,
extending is a matter of a few seconds.
I agree with that.
80GB drive, lvm up 50GB of it, and then you can grow whatever as needed.
It's not like you
Jarry wrote:
But even if it is so, if you resize partition by lvm, this advantage
could be lost. And if it even is possible to keep some partition
continuous, than resizing partition in lvm would be very long process:
if I resize 1st partition (the fastest, on the most outer cylinders)
and
On Thursday 16 February 2006 17:18, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 15:45, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 14:06, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Izar Ilun wrote:
I say that, It'll be just:
On 2/16/06, Hemmann, Volker Armin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 16:02, Richard Fish wrote:
Having / on its own partition can result in a similar improvement,
because the drive doesn't have to seek over your files in /home or
/opt to get to something in /lib.
it
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 17:18, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 15:45, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 14:06, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Izar Ilun wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 20:40:49 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
needed - What's needed, anyway?
/ and swap, nothing else :)
--
Neil Bothwick
Crayons can take you more places than starships. * Guinan
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Thursday 16 February 2006 21:11, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:46:57 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
If partition A
runs out of space while partition B has plenty,
Then you made B too large, which is the main cause of the problem.
Of course, but if your needs change,
On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:40, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 17:18, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 15:45, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16
On Thursday 16 February 2006 17:21, Alexander Skwar wrote:
You *can* tell LVM where to put LVs but you do not *have* to.
But how do you actually do that? Or are you talking about
the allocation policy? Like --contiguous y?
Well, first of all, you can pass lvcreate a list of physical
On 2/16/06, Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
/ and swap, nothing else :)
Well if we are going to be silly, you actually only need /
-Richard
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 20:40:49 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
needed - What's needed, anyway?
/ and swap, nothing else :)
Nah. / - that's it. swap *can* be a file :)
Alexander Skwar
--
Here comes Mr. Bill's dog.
-- Narrator, Saturday Night Live
--
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 20:40, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 17:18, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
On Thursday 16 February 2006 15:45, Alexander Skwar wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin
On 16 February 2006 22:12, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 20:40:49 +0100, Alexander Skwar wrote:
needed - What's needed, anyway?
/ and swap, nothing else :)
Actually, not even swap. ;-)
Amazing how passionate people turn over how to partition the system.
Uwe
--
Why do
66 matches
Mail list logo
