Re: resizing my slices/partitions - was pruning the Ports tree
On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 03:50:08PM -0600, Bill Moran wrote: Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: recently installing a full ports tree I find that my FBSD /usr slice is almost out of file handles. This is very unusual. There are generally more than enough inodes so that you don't run out of inodes before you run out of space. Did you use I don't think it's that unusual for a small slice. For example I recently installed FreeBSD on a 1.44GB hard drive, using the auto-defaults, and I ran out of inodes on /usr before sysinstall was finished installing the ports collection. That's when I learned about those options to newfs. It's only the inodes / block averaged over time figure that matters when determining the proper ratio. Some activities (like installing the ports collection) use a lot of inodes / block, but that doesn't mean the steady- state use of the system will continue to consume inodes at the same prodigious rate. The OP will probably be fine by giving himself twice the inodes on that partition. -- Danny MacMillan ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
resizing my slices/partitions - was pruning the Ports tree
Hello all: I would like to expand my FreeBSD partion on the hard drive of which it only has 60%. The rest of the HD holds an old installation of Win98. When I first installed FBSD 4.8 I used Partition Magic to carve off 1.2G of a 2.0G HD and give me dual boot capability so as to retain the Win98.After recently installing a full ports tree I find that my FBSD /usr slice is almost out of file handles. A sensible solution.. how about removing my 800M of Windows and capturing it for FBSD. NOTE - please read end of email concerning inodes. Looking for suggestions and warnings..! Of course I can blow everything away, reformat and re-install, but my preference would be to: 1) shutdown 2)use my partion magic boot disk to reformat the 800MB windows partion 3)use sysinstall to expand my /usr slice, maybe even resize some of the others Perhaps I can do this all with sysintall without even shutting down? I have not used that program since my original install 6 months ago so am not sure of its capabilities, weaknesses and strengths. Something important to note, I am not out of disk space but have run out of file handles (BSD calls them Inodes) - so it really is nodes that I need to recapture not space - might this have some implications that necessitate a complete reformat or re-install?? Suggestions and comments greatly appreciated. Cheers, Graham/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: resizing my slices/partitions - was pruning the Ports tree
[Please wrap your lines around 72 chars or so ... see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html ] Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all: I would like to expand my FreeBSD partion on the hard drive of which it only has 60%. The rest of the HD holds an old installation of Win98. When I first installed FBSD 4.8 I used Partition Magic to carve off 1.2G of a 2.0G HD and give me dual boot capability so as to retain the Win98.After recently installing a full ports tree I find that my FBSD /usr slice is almost out of file handles. This is very unusual. There are generally more than enough inodes so that you don't run out of inodes before you run out of space. Did you use custom options to newfs when you created the filesystem? Do you have a TON of small files? You may want to just ckeck the filesystem and see what's eating up all the inodes to make sure it isn't something you can just delete. My /usr filesystem is 10G, and the defaults created over 1 million inodes. I'm using 2.7G and 170,000 inodes, which means I'll run out of space when I still have 1/2-million free inodes. Of course I can blow everything away, reformat and re-install, but my preference would be to: 1) shutdown 2)use my partion magic boot disk to reformat the 800MB windows partion 3)use sysinstall to expand my /usr slice, maybe even resize some of the others Perhaps I can do this all with sysintall without even shutting down? I have not used that program since my original install 6 months ago so am not sure of its capabilities, weaknesses and strengths. You've got the right idea, but you're a little off. _Assuming_ your Windows partition is the last partition on the HDD, and the /usr partition is second to last, the following will work: 1) BACK UP any important data ... this procedure is easy to screw up! 2) Use PM or something similar to remove the Win partition and expenad the BSD partition to take up the space used by Win. You can also use BSD's disklabel and related utilities to do this (in single-user mode). 3) Boot FreeBSD into single-user mode 4) Use growfs to increase the size of the /usr filesystem to take up the partition. Since inodes are laid out in as a ration of #inodes/block, newfs will add more inodes in ration to the amount of space added. My point is that if you continue to use the filesystem in this manner, you're still going to run out of inodes before you fill the drive (even with the increased space). Although, this is a valid short-term fix that will provide you with more inodes. Depending on what you want to accomplish (long term) you may want to take the time now to backup this filesystem and re-newfs it with a value for -i that's appropriate. See the man page for newfs for more details. -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: resizing my slices/partitions - was pruning the Ports tree
Hello Bill: Thanks again for your help. Does the line wrap look better now? I reduced from 76 to 66. Regarding inodes - /usr is 778MB and began with 99,838 inodes. That would jive approximately with your million for 10G drive. It now has 96M of free space but only 590 inodes remaining.This heavy drain on inodes occurred when I downloaded the full Ports tree a month or so ago. Not sure of the numbers but it was clearly a TON of small files :--). /usr is /dev/ad0s2g - I cannot remember from my install but think that Windows may be the first partition..?? You said: _Assuming_ your Windows partition is the last partition on the HDD, and the /usr partition is second to last, the following will work: 1) BACK UP any important data ... this procedure is easy to screw up! 2) Use PM or something similar to remove the Win partition and expenad the BSD partition to take up the space used by Win. You can also use BSD's disklabel and related utilities to do this (in single-user mode). 3) Boot FreeBSD into single-user mode 4) Use growfs to increase the size of the /usr filesystem to take up the partition. I suspect that since the Ports download is an infrequent deal and most of my other files are much larger than the 500B or so of the Ports that the problem will be alleviated by adding space with a proportional number of nodes - (provided the next Ports update does not leave me with tons of debris) I will do some hunting for info on single user mode and growfs before proceeding. Is it necessary for me to user single user mode if I am the only user? I can of course restrict myself to a single logon. Thanks again for such really good help. Graham/ - Original Message - From: Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 2:50 PM Subject: Re: resizing my slices/partitions - was pruning the Ports tree [Please wrap your lines around 72 chars or so ... see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html ] Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all: I would like to expand my FreeBSD partion on the hard drive of which it only has 60%. The rest of the HD holds an old installation of Win98. When I first installed FBSD 4.8 I used Partition Magic to carve off 1.2G of a 2.0G HD and give me dual boot capability so as to retain the Win98.After recently installing a full ports tree I find that my FBSD /usr slice is almost out of file handles. This is very unusual. There are generally more than enough inodes so that you don't run out of inodes before you run out of space. Did you use custom options to newfs when you created the filesystem? Do you have a TON of small files? You may want to just ckeck the filesystem and see what's eating up all the inodes to make sure it isn't something you can just delete. My /usr filesystem is 10G, and the defaults created over 1 million inodes. I'm using 2.7G and 170,000 inodes, which means I'll run out of space when I still have 1/2-million free inodes. Of course I can blow everything away, reformat and re-install, but my preference would be to: 1) shutdown 2)use my partion magic boot disk to reformat the 800MB windows partion 3)use sysinstall to expand my /usr slice, maybe even resize some of the others Perhaps I can do this all with sysintall without even shutting down? I have not used that program since my original install 6 months ago so am not sure of its capabilities, weaknesses and strengths. You've got the right idea, but you're a little off. _Assuming_ your Windows partition is the last partition on the HDD, and the /usr partition is second to last, the following will work: 1) BACK UP any important data ... this procedure is easy to screw up! 2) Use PM or something similar to remove the Win partition and expenad the BSD partition to take up the space used by Win. You can also use BSD's disklabel and related utilities to do this (in single-user mode). 3) Boot FreeBSD into single-user mode 4) Use growfs to increase the size of the /usr filesystem to take up the partition. Since inodes are laid out in as a ration of #inodes/block, newfs will add more inodes in ration to the amount of space added. My point is that if you continue to use the filesystem in this manner, you're still going to run out of inodes before you fill the drive (even with the increased space). Although, this is a valid short-term fix that will provide you with more inodes. Depending on what you want to accomplish (long term) you may want to take the time now to backup this filesystem and re-newfs it with a value for -i that's appropriate. See the man page for newfs for more details. -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any
Re: resizing my slices/partitions - was pruning the Ports tree
Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Bill: Thanks again for your help. Does the line wrap look better now? I reduced from 76 to 66. You tell me. Regarding inodes - /usr is 778MB and began with 99,838 inodes. That would jive approximately with your million for 10G drive. It now has 96M of free space but only 590 inodes remaining.This heavy drain on inodes occurred when I downloaded the full Ports tree a month or so ago. Not sure of the numbers but it was clearly a TON of small files :--). /usr is /dev/ad0s2g - I cannot remember from my install but think that Windows may be the first partition..?? If so, you're probably hosed. To add space onto a partition, the available space needs to be immediately after it. Unless Partition Magic can move things around to put the free space immediately after the /usr partition, you're not going to be able to growfs it. Last time I used PM, it didn't have much understanding of BSD filesystems, that may have changed, but I don't know. You said: _Assuming_ your Windows partition is the last partition on the HDD, and the /usr partition is second to last, the following will work: 1) BACK UP any important data ... this procedure is easy to screw up! 2) Use PM or something similar to remove the Win partition and expenad the BSD partition to take up the space used by Win. You can also use BSD's disklabel and related utilities to do this (in single-user mode). 3) Boot FreeBSD into single-user mode 4) Use growfs to increase the size of the /usr filesystem to take up the partition. I suspect that since the Ports download is an infrequent deal and most of my other files are much larger than the 500B or so of the Ports that the problem will be alleviated by adding space with a proportional number of nodes - (provided the next Ports update does not leave me with tons of debris) Yes, the ports uses a lot of inodes, as it's a lot of directories and small files. I didn't know that partition was so small. I will do some hunting for info on single user mode and growfs before proceeding. Is it necessary for me to user single user mode if I am the only user? I can of course restrict myself to a single logon. You need to be in single-user so the /usr partition is unmounted. You can't growfs a mounted partition (unless something has changed?) If you can manage to get the /usr partition unmounted in multiuser mode, that will work as well. Thanks again for such really good help. Graham/ - Original Message - From: Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 2:50 PM Subject: Re: resizing my slices/partitions - was pruning the Ports tree [Please wrap your lines around 72 chars or so ... see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html ] Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all: I would like to expand my FreeBSD partion on the hard drive of which it only has 60%. The rest of the HD holds an old installation of Win98. When I first installed FBSD 4.8 I used Partition Magic to carve off 1.2G of a 2.0G HD and give me dual boot capability so as to retain the Win98.After recently installing a full ports tree I find that my FBSD /usr slice is almost out of file handles. This is very unusual. There are generally more than enough inodes so that you don't run out of inodes before you run out of space. Did you use custom options to newfs when you created the filesystem? Do you have a TON of small files? You may want to just ckeck the filesystem and see what's eating up all the inodes to make sure it isn't something you can just delete. My /usr filesystem is 10G, and the defaults created over 1 million inodes. I'm using 2.7G and 170,000 inodes, which means I'll run out of space when I still have 1/2-million free inodes. Of course I can blow everything away, reformat and re-install, but my preference would be to: 1) shutdown 2)use my partion magic boot disk to reformat the 800MB windows partion 3)use sysinstall to expand my /usr slice, maybe even resize some of the others Perhaps I can do this all with sysintall without even shutting down? I have not used that program since my original install 6 months ago so am not sure of its capabilities, weaknesses and strengths. You've got the right idea, but you're a little off. _Assuming_ your Windows partition is the last partition on the HDD, and the /usr partition is second to last, the following will work: 1) BACK UP any important data ... this procedure is easy to screw up! 2) Use PM or something similar to remove the Win partition and expenad the BSD partition to take up the space used by Win. You can also use BSD's disklabel and related utilities to do this (in single-user mode). 3) Boot FreeBSD into single-user mode 4) Use
Re: [going OT] Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 08:36:18AM +0400, Sergey Zaharchenko wrote: On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 08:32:49PM -0600, Dan MacMillan probably wrote: From: Sergey Zaharchenko at June 16, 2004 06:18 On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:38:38AM +0100, Matthew Seaman probably wrote: Heh. There's nothing to worry about -- I don't own or use any Windows boxes, so there's no chance of picking up a worm from my e-mails. However, this won't save you from picking up a worm which has forged its mail's `From' address to be [EMAIL PROTECTED], or any other address... so unless you change your OS and/or mailer to something more secure, it's still a good idea to stay alert. On the other hand, the fact that Matthew signs all his email means we always know who to blame. :) More to the point, you know that if it's signed by my key, it's from me, even if I do occasionally slip up and use the work e-mail address when I should be using my personal one (Bad mutt! No biscuit!) Sure --- but his signatures mean nothing to Graham as long as he uses Outlook, which was the original problem :) Unless, of course he has visited http://www.pgpi.org/ and downloaded one of the free Windows version of PGPi which includes a plugin for Outlook: http://www.pgpi.org/cgi/download.cgi?filename=PGPFW658Win32.zip Although it seems that PGP Corp have decided that the latest versions of their software will only include the e-mail plugin in the pay-for variant. Dunno if that software will work with WinXP either. But thems the breaks when you use commercial OSes. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK pgpd1aj0YjKSG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
On Sun, Jun 13, 2004 at 03:41:53PM -0700, Graham North wrote: I did not open it at first because it came as two attachments a txt file and a dat file. What is your rationale for doing this? What is the dat file - that still remains unopened. Heh. There's nothing to worry about -- I don't own or use any Windows boxes, so there's no chance of picking up a worm from my e-mails. What you are seeing is Outlook (or Outlook express) brokeness. The e-mails I send are signed using gpg(1), which uses a special 'multipart/signed' MIME type for the message body. See RFC 2440 for details. However, Outlook thinks it knows best and ignores the 'Content-Disposition: inline' header. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK pgp5tkCy98Tz1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:38:38AM +0100, Matthew Seaman probably wrote: On Sun, Jun 13, 2004 at 03:41:53PM -0700, Graham North wrote: Heh. There's nothing to worry about -- I don't own or use any Windows boxes, so there's no chance of picking up a worm from my e-mails. However, this won't save you from picking up a worm which has forged its mail's `From' address to be [EMAIL PROTECTED], or any other address... so unless you change your OS and/or mailer to something more secure, it's still a good idea to stay alert. -- DoubleF If today is the first day of the rest of your life, what the hell was yesterday? pgpwJF3rEdyrU.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Pruning the Ports Tree
From: Sergey Zaharchenko at June 16, 2004 06:18 On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:38:38AM +0100, Matthew Seaman probably wrote: On Sun, Jun 13, 2004 at 03:41:53PM -0700, Graham North wrote: Heh. There's nothing to worry about -- I don't own or use any Windows boxes, so there's no chance of picking up a worm from my e-mails. However, this won't save you from picking up a worm which has forged its mail's `From' address to be [EMAIL PROTECTED], or any other address... so unless you change your OS and/or mailer to something more secure, it's still a good idea to stay alert. On the other hand, the fact that Matthew signs all his email means we always know who to blame. :) -- Danny ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[going OT] Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 08:32:49PM -0600, Dan MacMillan probably wrote: From: Sergey Zaharchenko at June 16, 2004 06:18 On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:38:38AM +0100, Matthew Seaman probably wrote: Heh. There's nothing to worry about -- I don't own or use any Windows boxes, so there's no chance of picking up a worm from my e-mails. However, this won't save you from picking up a worm which has forged its mail's `From' address to be [EMAIL PROTECTED], or any other address... so unless you change your OS and/or mailer to something more secure, it's still a good idea to stay alert. On the other hand, the fact that Matthew signs all his email means we always know who to blame. :) -- Danny Sure --- but his signatures mean nothing to Graham as long as he uses Outlook, which was the original problem :) -- DoubleF It is now 10 p.m. Do you know where Henry Kissinger is? -- Elizabeth Carpenter pgpcdQjPA4OQ7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:52:18 -0700 Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Uli and the rest of the FreeBSD forum: Thanks for your advice - though I am not entirely sure what the purpose of your last questions are. To answer though: My HD is about 1.2G - it is sharing 2.0G with another OS. /usr~ 778M usr/ports ~247M total /usr being used is ~595M with about 183M free. The problem is not disk space - it appears to be file handles. Remember, those ports files are only about 0.5K each - so lots of inodes are being used in file infrastructure. Midnight Comm which I use for a lot of file navigation indicates that I had 99838 inodes available - of which there are now only 602 free! Yesterday that was about 900, but then I mirrored part of a friend's website and used another 300. As you can see, I need to free up some file handling capability. Thanks for any further advice you can give. Cheers, Graham/ Hi Graham You might consider using a file-backed disk (see the handbook sec 12.11) for your portstree. This should save a lot of inodes at the cost of wasting some space on your hd. Something along the lines of: 1) Point workdirs and distfiles to directories outside the ports dir by setting the environmental variables WRKDIRPREFIX and DISTDIR (man ports). 2) Estimate what will be the maximum size of your portstree for the lifetime of your setup, create a file of this size and make it into a file-backed disk. 3) Mount this file-backed disk on /usr/ports. For this to be meaningful you obviously have to remove your current portstree and build one on your file-backed disk. I'm running a setup similar to this for sharing ports between jails without any problems. (You might even be able to create the file-backed disk on the slice you are sharing with another OS and gain some space on /usr, if needed.) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
Hello Peder: Thank you for this suggestion, I will give it some thought. Thanks to everyone for their help - should other commets come in during the next couple of days please note that I will be offline for a little while so do not feel I am being rude if not responding immediately. Cheers all, Graham/ - Original Message - From: Peder Blom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 9:55 AM Subject: Re: Pruning the Ports Tree On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:52:18 -0700 Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Uli and the rest of the FreeBSD forum: Thanks for your advice - though I am not entirely sure what the purpose of your last questions are. To answer though: My HD is about 1.2G - it is sharing 2.0G with another OS. /usr~ 778M usr/ports ~247M total /usr being used is ~595M with about 183M free. The problem is not disk space - it appears to be file handles. Remember, those ports files are only about 0.5K each - so lots of inodes are being used in file infrastructure. Midnight Comm which I use for a lot of file navigation indicates that I had 99838 inodes available - of which there are now only 602 free! Yesterday that was about 900, but then I mirrored part of a friend's website and used another 300. As you can see, I need to free up some file handling capability. Thanks for any further advice you can give. Cheers, Graham/ Hi Graham You might consider using a file-backed disk (see the handbook sec 12.11) for your portstree. This should save a lot of inodes at the cost of wasting some space on your hd. Something along the lines of: 1) Point workdirs and distfiles to directories outside the ports dir by setting the environmental variables WRKDIRPREFIX and DISTDIR (man ports). 2) Estimate what will be the maximum size of your portstree for the lifetime of your setup, create a file of this size and make it into a file-backed disk. 3) Mount this file-backed disk on /usr/ports. For this to be meaningful you obviously have to remove your current portstree and build one on your file-backed disk. I'm running a setup similar to this for sharing ports between jails without any problems. (You might even be able to create the file-backed disk on the slice you are sharing with another OS and gain some space on /usr, if needed.) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pruning the Ports Tree
Is it alright to prune the Ports tree - and still do updates later. I am running 4.8 stable and recently did a full Ports tree update using CVSUP. This generates several questions. 1) I took the advice of Michael Urban's book and upgraded from the Head of the source tree rather than from that for 4.8 - did I really want to do that? Does it matter for a Ports only updating? 2) The tree is getting pretty big - result, lots of files. My hard drive is not very big - it is down to a few hundred inodes (file handles) within the usr directory. Can I prune the tree on my hard drive without compromising future updates? If it helps, my machine is not using X only command mode so there are lots of Ports that will never be made. Thanks for any help that can be offered. Graham/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Graham North wrote: Is it alright to prune the Ports tree - and still do updates later. I am running 4.8 stable and recently did a full Ports tree update using CVSUP. This generates several questions. 1) I took the advice of Michael Urban's book and upgraded from the Head of the source tree rather than from that for 4.8 - did I really want to do that? Does it matter for a Ports only updating? It is recommended to use the appropriate kernel and base system with your ports. Things might work the way you did it, or (probably) not. 2) The tree is getting pretty big - result, lots of files. My hard drive is not very big - it is down to a few hundred inodes (file handles) within the usr directory. Can I prune the tree on my hard drive without compromising future updates? If it helps, my machine is not using X only command mode so there are lots of Ports that will never be made. For further advices it would be helpful to know how big your hd is and how much diskspace is used by your ports tree. You can check the latter by # du -h -d 1 (see # man du) Regards, Uli. Thanks for any help that can be offered. Graham/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +---+ |Peter Ulrich Kruppa| | Wuppertal | | Germany | +---+ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
Lose 10 karma points for not keeping your line lengths reasonably short. On Sat, Jun 12, 2004 at 11:41:47PM -0700, Graham North wrote: Is it alright to prune the Ports tree - and still do updates later. You're on your own if you do this. All of the infrastructure that supports the use of the prots tree assumes that you will have a complete tree in place. People telling cvsup to refuse chunks of the ports tree (usually the language specific stuff) and then finding that building the INDEX no longer works are a perennial sight on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list. Having said that, now that you can just grab a freshly build INDEX from the FreeBSD servers and there's no huge necessity to build your own, refusing stuff should be less of a trap for the unwary. Use # cd /usr/ports # make fetchindex to grab a fresh index (about 5MiB). I am running 4.8 stable and recently did a full Ports tree update using CVSUP. This generates several questions. 1) I took the advice of Michael Urban's book and upgraded from the Head of the source tree rather than from that for 4.8 - did I really want to do that? Does it matter for a Ports only updating? That is correct. You as an individual user should only ever want to grab the HEAD of the ports tree. All those RELEASE_4_10_0 labels just mark the state of the tree at the point that the various release CDs or DVDs were compiled. You'll note the difference compared to the system sources, which use RELENG_4_10 and similar: such labels simply do not exist within the ports tree, and if you try and cvsup ports specifying one of them, cvsup will simply delete everything under /usr/ports. 2) The tree is getting pretty big - result, lots of files. My hard drive is not very big - it is down to a few hundred inodes (file handles) within the usr directory. Can I prune the tree on my hard drive without compromising future updates? If it helps, my machine is not using X only command mode so there are lots of Ports that will never be made. The ports tree isn't actually that big, considering that there are now about 11,000 ports. However, as you use the ports, you will tend to generate all sorts of other files and directories within the tree that take up lots of space. Such as: i) Distfiles -- the source code for the ports you have installed. Use 'portsclean -D' to get rid of any out of date distfiles, or 'portsclean -DD' to get rid of any distfiles that don't correspond to ports you have installed. ii) README.html files. These appear if you run make readmes -- they're not necessary for day to day use of the ports tree, and can just be deleted. Plus not having 'README.html' files around keeps them out of the way of cvsup(1). To kill them all off: # cd /usr/ports # find . -name README.html -print0 | xargs -0 rm iii) work directories -- the directories where each port is actually built. Once the port has been installed there's not much use for hanging onto those. If you use portupgrade it will usually clean them up as it goes along. Otherwise you can do: # portsclean -C or alternatively: # cd /usr/ports # make clean -DNOCLEANDEPENDS If you don't use '-DNOCLEANDEPENDS' the clean-up will take a great deal longer to eventually produce exactly the same result. It's true that the ports tree does consist of a large number of quite small files, and that will tend to use up inodes quite rapidly. However, you can't increase the number of inodes on a filesystem without wiping it out completely and rebuilding from scratch. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK pgpngBIcsY6rh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
Hi Uli and the rest of the FreeBSD forum: Thanks for your advice - though I am not entirely sure what the purpose of your last questions are. To answer though: My HD is about 1.2G - it is sharing 2.0G with another OS. /usr~ 778M usr/ports ~247M total /usr being used is ~595M with about 183M free. The problem is not disk space - it appears to be file handles. Remember, those ports files are only about 0.5K each - so lots of inodes are being used in file infrastructure. Midnight Comm which I use for a lot of file navigation indicates that I had 99838 inodes available - of which there are now only 602 free! Yesterday that was about 900, but then I mirrored part of a friend's website and used another 300. As you can see, I need to free up some file handling capability. Thanks for any further advice you can give. Cheers, Graham/ - Original Message - From: Peter Ulrich Kruppa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 1:29 AM Subject: Re: Pruning the Ports Tree On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Graham North wrote: Is it alright to prune the Ports tree - and still do updates later. I am running 4.8 stable and recently did a full Ports tree update using CVSUP. This generates several questions. 1) I took the advice of Michael Urban's book and upgraded from the Head of the source tree rather than from that for 4.8 - did I really want to do that? Does it matter for a Ports only updating? It is recommended to use the appropriate kernel and base system with your ports. Things might work the way you did it, or (probably) not. 2) The tree is getting pretty big - result, lots of files. My hard drive is not very big - it is down to a few hundred inodes (file handles) within the usr directory. Can I prune the tree on my hard drive without compromising future updates? If it helps, my machine is not using X only command mode so there are lots of Ports that will never be made. For further advices it would be helpful to know how big your hd is and how much diskspace is used by your ports tree. You can check the latter by # du -h -d 1 (see # man du) Regards, Uli. Thanks for any help that can be offered. Graham/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +---+ |Peter Ulrich Kruppa| | Wuppertal | | Germany | +---+ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Graham North wrote: Hi Uli and the rest of the FreeBSD forum: Thanks for your advice - though I am not entirely sure what the purpose of your last questions are. I wanted to know about your ressources, since your ports dirctory might grow very big, if you don't clean it up every now and then. Matthew gave some hints about that at the last part of his mail. I hardly know anything about inodes, but as far as I understand, you would have to reformat your entire filesystem to change anything about this. The simpliest way to update your system on a small hd would be to keep strictly to binary upgrades and installations. You won't need the ports directory then (neither the system sources in /usr/src). Another simple idea would be to get another small hd somewhere, devide it into two slices and mount one on /usr/ports and the other on /usr/src . This would give you enough space to do full rebuilds of your system and your ports. If you have enough patience and time you can also download single port directories from www.freebsd.org/ports, place them in appropriate directories and try to make install them. They will complain when they are missing some other port. I have done that to set up a samba printer server, but next time I will use binary packages. Uli. To answer though: My HD is about 1.2G - it is sharing 2.0G with another OS. /usr~ 778M usr/ports ~247M total /usr being used is ~595M with about 183M free. The problem is not disk space - it appears to be file handles. Remember, those ports files are only about 0.5K each - so lots of inodes are being used in file infrastructure. Midnight Comm which I use for a lot of file navigation indicates that I had 99838 inodes available - of which there are now only 602 free! Yesterday that was about 900, but then I mirrored part of a friend's website and used another 300. As you can see, I need to free up some file handling capability. Thanks for any further advice you can give. Cheers, Graham/ - Original Message - From: Peter Ulrich Kruppa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 1:29 AM Subject: Re: Pruning the Ports Tree On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Graham North wrote: Is it alright to prune the Ports tree - and still do updates later. I am running 4.8 stable and recently did a full Ports tree update using CVSUP. This generates several questions. 1) I took the advice of Michael Urban's book and upgraded from the Head of the source tree rather than from that for 4.8 - did I really want to do that? Does it matter for a Ports only updating? It is recommended to use the appropriate kernel and base system with your ports. Things might work the way you did it, or (probably) not. 2) The tree is getting pretty big - result, lots of files. My hard drive is not very big - it is down to a few hundred inodes (file handles) within the usr directory. Can I prune the tree on my hard drive without compromising future updates? If it helps, my machine is not using X only command mode so there are lots of Ports that will never be made. For further advices it would be helpful to know how big your hd is and how much diskspace is used by your ports tree. You can check the latter by # du -h -d 1 (see # man du) Regards, Uli. Thanks for any help that can be offered. Graham/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +---+ |Peter Ulrich Kruppa| | Wuppertal | | Germany | +---+ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +---+ |Peter Ulrich Kruppa| | Wuppertal | | Germany | +---+ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
Hi Uli: Thanks again. There was an email from Mathew Seaman - however it came as only attachments, and not knowing him I did not open them - there was not text at all in the body of the email. Maybe I will now open it.. I do not know anything much about inodes or file handles either... My thinking was to just use brute force and chop away much of the ports collection that I am not likely to need on my little web server. There are a myriad of ports for audio, games etc. not to mention X files. That should free up a lot of file handles. I don't want to put everything into too much of a tizzy however the next time I update them. Probably the most sensible thing to do is simply remove it entirely and just do single port upgrades as needs be. Cheers, Graham/ - Original Message - From: Peter Ulrich Kruppa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 3:11 PM Subject: Re: Pruning the Ports Tree On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Graham North wrote: Hi Uli and the rest of the FreeBSD forum: Thanks for your advice - though I am not entirely sure what the purpose of your last questions are. I wanted to know about your ressources, since your ports dirctory might grow very big, if you don't clean it up every now and then. Matthew gave some hints about that at the last part of his mail. I hardly know anything about inodes, but as far as I understand, you would have to reformat your entire filesystem to change anything about this. The simpliest way to update your system on a small hd would be to keep strictly to binary upgrades and installations. You won't need the ports directory then (neither the system sources in /usr/src). Another simple idea would be to get another small hd somewhere, devide it into two slices and mount one on /usr/ports and the other on /usr/src . This would give you enough space to do full rebuilds of your system and your ports. If you have enough patience and time you can also download single port directories from www.freebsd.org/ports, place them in appropriate directories and try to make install them. They will complain when they are missing some other port. I have done that to set up a samba printer server, but next time I will use binary packages. Uli. To answer though: My HD is about 1.2G - it is sharing 2.0G with another OS. /usr~ 778M usr/ports ~247M total /usr being used is ~595M with about 183M free. The problem is not disk space - it appears to be file handles. Remember, those ports files are only about 0.5K each - so lots of inodes are being used in file infrastructure. Midnight Comm which I use for a lot of file navigation indicates that I had 99838 inodes available - of which there are now only 602 free! Yesterday that was about 900, but then I mirrored part of a friend's website and used another 300. As you can see, I need to free up some file handling capability. Thanks for any further advice you can give. Cheers, Graham/ - Original Message - From: Peter Ulrich Kruppa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 1:29 AM Subject: Re: Pruning the Ports Tree On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Graham North wrote: Is it alright to prune the Ports tree - and still do updates later. I am running 4.8 stable and recently did a full Ports tree update using CVSUP. This generates several questions. 1) I took the advice of Michael Urban's book and upgraded from the Head of the source tree rather than from that for 4.8 - did I really want to do that? Does it matter for a Ports only updating? It is recommended to use the appropriate kernel and base system with your ports. Things might work the way you did it, or (probably) not. 2) The tree is getting pretty big - result, lots of files. My hard drive is not very big - it is down to a few hundred inodes (file handles) within the usr directory. Can I prune the tree on my hard drive without compromising future updates? If it helps, my machine is not using X only command mode so there are lots of Ports that will never be made. For further advices it would be helpful to know how big your hd is and how much diskspace is used by your ports tree. You can check the latter by # du -h -d 1 (see # man du) Regards, Uli. Thanks for any help that can be offered. Graham/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +---+ |Peter Ulrich Kruppa| | Wuppertal | | Germany | +---+ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
Hello Mathew: Thanks for this great reply. I will try some of your suggestions to remove files. I did not open it at first because it came as two attachments a txt file and a dat file. What is your rationale for doing this? What is the dat file - that still remains unopened. Cheers, Graham/ - Original Message - From: Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fong, Nicholas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 2:08 AM Subject: Re: Pruning the Ports Tree ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pruning the Ports Tree
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Graham North wrote: Hi Uli: Thanks again. There was an email from Mathew Seaman - however it came as only attachments, and not knowing him I did not open them - there was not text at all in the body of the email. Maybe I will now open it.. I read my emails with pine (a console mail client) on my FreeBSD system - no chance for Windows virii. I do not know anything much about inodes or file handles either... My thinking was to just use brute force and chop away much of the ports collection that I am not likely to need on my little web server. Too true, you would need - apache (and if you like mod_php and mysql ???) - midnight commander (mc) for file management - a console browser (links or lynx) for quick checks. Still I would recommend binary upgrades, these programs don't need any special compile time options. But that's your fun. Uli. I don't want to put everything into too much of a tizzy however the next time I update them. Probably the most sensible thing to do is simply remove it entirely and just do single port upgrades as needs be. Cheers, Graham/ - Original Message - From: Peter Ulrich Kruppa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 3:11 PM Subject: Re: Pruning the Ports Tree On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Graham North wrote: Hi Uli and the rest of the FreeBSD forum: Thanks for your advice - though I am not entirely sure what the purpose of your last questions are. I wanted to know about your ressources, since your ports dirctory might grow very big, if you don't clean it up every now and then. Matthew gave some hints about that at the last part of his mail. I hardly know anything about inodes, but as far as I understand, you would have to reformat your entire filesystem to change anything about this. The simpliest way to update your system on a small hd would be to keep strictly to binary upgrades and installations. You won't need the ports directory then (neither the system sources in /usr/src). Another simple idea would be to get another small hd somewhere, devide it into two slices and mount one on /usr/ports and the other on /usr/src . This would give you enough space to do full rebuilds of your system and your ports. If you have enough patience and time you can also download single port directories from www.freebsd.org/ports, place them in appropriate directories and try to make install them. They will complain when they are missing some other port. I have done that to set up a samba printer server, but next time I will use binary packages. Uli. To answer though: My HD is about 1.2G - it is sharing 2.0G with another OS. /usr~ 778M usr/ports ~247M total /usr being used is ~595M with about 183M free. The problem is not disk space - it appears to be file handles. Remember, those ports files are only about 0.5K each - so lots of inodes are being used in file infrastructure. Midnight Comm which I use for a lot of file navigation indicates that I had 99838 inodes available - of which there are now only 602 free! Yesterday that was about 900, but then I mirrored part of a friend's website and used another 300. As you can see, I need to free up some file handling capability. Thanks for any further advice you can give. Cheers, Graham/ - Original Message - From: Peter Ulrich Kruppa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Graham North [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 1:29 AM Subject: Re: Pruning the Ports Tree On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Graham North wrote: Is it alright to prune the Ports tree - and still do updates later. I am running 4.8 stable and recently did a full Ports tree update using CVSUP. This generates several questions. 1) I took the advice of Michael Urban's book and upgraded from the Head of the source tree rather than from that for 4.8 - did I really want to do that? Does it matter for a Ports only updating? It is recommended to use the appropriate kernel and base system with your ports. Things might work the way you did it, or (probably) not. 2) The tree is getting pretty big - result, lots of files. My hard drive is not very big - it is down to a few hundred inodes (file handles) within the usr directory. Can I prune the tree on my hard drive without compromising future updates? If it helps, my machine is not using X only command mode so there are lots of Ports that will never be made. For further advices it would be helpful to know how big your hd is and how much diskspace is used by your ports tree. You can check the latter by # du -h -d 1 (see # man du) Regards, Uli. Thanks for any help that can be offered. Graham/ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +---+ |Peter Ulrich Kruppa| | Wuppertal | | Germany
