I'm curious - why does relink happen under /usr ? I would expect such transient activities - like storage of temporary object files - to occur under /var somewhere. I'm sure there's a good reason for the choice, but at first glance it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
It might also help resolve this ongoing issue with relink in corner-case conditions (I too have battled the same issue as Henrich with /usr filling up in various ways on small disks). FWIW I tend to size /var with consideration it will grow over time, for archiving logs and such. To me, /usr should be more deterministic. Per FHS, /usr should be able to be mounted read-only and able to be exported over NFS and shared across hosts. Regards Lloyd Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2025/11/13 22:13, H. Hartzer wrote: > > > Hi bugs@, > > > > I installed 7.8 with VMM to a 12.5GB disk. I chose the automatic > > partitioning defaults, and /usr is too small to relink the kernel with. > > I used x86_64. > > > yeah, there are various disk sizes where disklabel -A makes bad choices > and in the worst cases just plain don't work. > > > a: 213.5M 64 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # / > > > that is rather optimistic. 256 would be better but I like to go with > closer to 1G or so. > > > b: 207.0M 437280 swap > > c: 12800.0M 0 unused > > d: 221.6M 861216 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /tmp > > e: 245.1M 1315008 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /var > > > it's not very fun when /var runs out of space and this is tight too. > > > f: 1627.0M 1816928 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr > > g: 422.1M 5148992 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr/X11R6 > > > for syspatch/reorder_kernel and some hope of sysupgrade working you > really don't want less than 2.5GB (more if /usr/X11R6 is not a separate > filesystem), typically I use single fs for /usr and X11R6 and give it > 8-10GB or so. > > > h: 1214.5M 6013440 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr/local > > > as with many disk sizes (check src/regress/sbin/disklabel for examples), > this is too small for much use of packages. > > > i: 2073.4M 8500704 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr/src > > j: 5170.8M 12747008 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr/obj > > > providing for /usr/src and /usr/obj on such a small disk doesn't seem a > smart choice. they can't really be shrunk below a certain minimum > otherwise they're not useful, but on various size disks they're burning > space badly needed elsewhere. I think they should be skipped unless the > more critical fs are above a certain minimum saner size. > > here's one possible attempt at changing this, I think it's for the > better but I'm sure there will be some disagreement. > > I added some more sizes to regress that I think aren't too uncommon in > VMs and removed some that are too small. I don't have a sparc64 to regen > those variants. > > FWIW I never use the current disklabel defaults without at least > tweaking them a bit.
