I noticed this problem too.
There is also a related problem with FAQ (and please forgive me for hijacking
the thread!): if someone follows these instructions to the letter, correcting
for the file hierarchy, of course, they can end up with no space in /usr.
Specifically,
a) By default, disklabel(1) allocates at most 2G to /usr when auto-install is
selected.
b) With all packages selected during the install, /usr occupies 830M on my
system:
thor# du -k -d 1 /usr | egrep -v 'ports|X11R6|local|obj|src|usr$|total' | \
awk '{ t+= $2 }; END { print t }'
830910
c) ports and xenocara, unpacked, collectively occupy 1G.
That means that after installing all the packages + ports + xenocara, /usr is
almost full; and during an upgrade, it can be filled completely, which happened
to me recently.
I'm happy to submit a documentation patch, but I'm not sure what's the right
approach here - e.g., I can see how any of the following could seem a proper
solution to some, so I would like to get some input from more experienced
OpenBSD users:
0. Do not change anything - if a user install xenocara and ports, she should
understand what she is doing; and if she ends up eating up all the space in
/usr, it's a good exercise in recovering and a reminder to plan ahead.
1. Change the documentation, suggesting that users installing all sources
(xenocara + ports) should think about space and possibly increase size of /usr
during the install.
2. Change the documentation, suggesting other places for placing xenocara
sources (/usr/local ?)
3. Change the defaults for disklabel(1), allocating more space to /usr in
auto-install mode.
#3 would not solve the problem for people with smaller disks, and has a
potential to eat space for people who don't care about sources. #2 would
probably break some other examples and people's expectations. So I would think
either #0 or #1 is the right approach.
Thoughts?
On Sun, Nov 11, 2018, at 11:01 AM, Robert Urban wrote:
> Hello,
>
> until v6.2, xenocara.tar.gz contained a hierarchy whose top node was
> "xenocara",
> which meant that it should be unpacked with CWD=/usr. Since v6.3 the
> "xenocara"
> top node is gone, which means, if one follows these FAQ instructions:
>
> > $ *cd /usr/src*
> > $ *tar xzf /tmp/src.tar.gz*
> > $ *tar xzf /tmp/sys.tar.gz*
> > $ *cd /usr*
> > $ *tar xzf /tmp/ports.tar.gz*
> > $ *tar xzf /tmp/xenocara.tar.gz*
>
> one screws up one's /usr filesystem with a bunch of stuff that does not belong
> there, and overwrites several files in /usr/share/mk/.
>
> Either the FAQ is wrong, or the tarball is wrong. Does anyone think it
> worthwhile fixing this?
>
> Regards,
>
> Robert Urban
>
