Partitioning schemes (was RE: Mailman....)

[Neil Ford]

>On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 10:42:34AM +0000, Steve Mynott wrote:
>>  "David H. Adler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>  >
>>  > Oh, you're much too kind.  My redhat box is disintigrating before my
>>  > very eyes.  root partition filled up for no reason and, thus I looked
>>  > at the partition table:
>>  >
>>  > /
>>  > /boot
>>  > /home
>>  >
>>  > With home being the largest.
>>  >
>>  > What *were* they thinking when they configured this?
>>
>>  I don't think you can really blame the distribution (which allows you
>>  to partition the disk how you want) for someone partitioning the disk
>>  wrongly.
>
>Except that the box came to me like this.  I intend to rectify this in
>a bit by scaping red hat off with a large trowel and installing
>something useful, but I'm still trying to figure out why *anyone*
>would partition it this way... :-/
>
Because they were used to the BSD way of things where most stuff goes 
in /usr and were expecting Linux to put it all in /home.

As an example, our BSD box is configured like so;

Filesystem  1K-blocks     Used    Avail Capacity  Mounted on
/dev/ad0s1a     49583    35441    10176    78%    /
/dev/ad0s1f  13350937  3817961  8464902    31%    /usr
/dev/ad0s1e     19815     6170    12060    34%    /var
procfs              4        4        0   100%    /proc

So that might be one answer.

Neil.
-- 
Neil C. Ford
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.binky.ourshack.org