On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 10:56:00AM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 03:41:53PM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: > > > With that little disk space, I would be inclined to make it all > > > just one root (/) partition - with a bit of swap. You might not > > > even be able to have a swap as big as memory with no more disk than > > > that, but try for a swap of memory size or at least 100 MB or so > > > and the rest in /. > > > > > > I think FreeBSD has grown since they made those claims of 250 MB > > > being enough for a minimum. You might be able to cram it in, > > > but would have little room for doing anything. > > > > That is realy a bad idee. > > > > / is supposted to be small to limit the change that something > > irriversible happens to it during a crash > > /tmp can be mounted so that it gets a real power boost > > > > There are many other reason why not to do this. I can't think of them > > this quickly. > > We ain't talking a commercial grade server operation here. > With this small a disk, the more space you dead-end by consigning > it to a file system that isn't getting used the more you limit > what you can do -- in this case.
Still the size of root is constand over time. Haveing two partitions (/ and /disk/) whould be better. You then can ln -s /tmp /usr /... to share these. Personaly I would juist try it out one or two times before installing it diffently. Then then do it with sepperated partitions. > I would not do this if I had > lots of disk, but... > > Actually, some of the heavy hitters out there say they have been > leaning toward all / disk partitioning + swap, of course. That doesn't make it a good idee. I woudn't jump in to the watter even if everybody else did. -- Alex Articles based on solutions that I use: http://www.kruijff.org/alex/FreeBSD/ _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"