Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> I have a follow-up question...
> Being utterly uncertain of the sizes of the different parts of my file system,
> why should I partition it at all (I understand the Swap issue)??
>
> What is the down-side of having a single large partition? Please elaborate,
> because I can't see it.
Thanks a lot for the various inputs...
Comments;
a) fsck: N runs on X size takes longer than 1 run of N*X size ??
b) seek times: I don't believe the HD would take any substantially longer time.
The head movement is the most time consuming, and provided the access is equally
distributed, I can't see the partition sizes affecting it.
c) / and disk overflow: Very valid point and I will evaluate the effect on my
system.
d) /home directory full & movements: can be solved in other ways
e) /tmp security hole: I really don't understand this, but I acknowledge its
existence.
f) Multiple kernels: Ok, that's for you all folks who have time to mess around
with it. I stick to a standard distribution, so I exclude myself from the chain
of errors. I think we are at a point we the large majority of Linux users will
not compile their own kernels. Which I think is good.
Since I am more into danger of HD failures than Hacker risks, I have 3 disks on
my system. One disk for System and RPMed programs, One disk for my work and
programs that I need to compile myself, plus one disk for backup. Each of the
disks only have a single partition.
My point has been (especially when drive space was severely restricted and
expensive), how would I know beforehand how my /usr, /var or /home will fill up?
Blind guesses? Making a bad guess, and I will severly cripple the system. Having
the single partition, I don't need to guess.
I will re-evaluate my setup.
Thanks
Niclas
