The FAQ is intended for the average user.
The non-average user can understand what is there, and make different
choices.
People who compile X or the src tree are not average users, and should
create additional partitions to store that stuff.
The FAQ should *NOT* be changed to accomodate the non-average user, because
by doing so you create hell for the average user who is new and doesn't
need that information.
> 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
> >
>
