| Mike Leone on Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:43:14 -0500 |
|
gabriel rosenkoetter (gr@eclipsed.net) had this to say on 11/21/02 at 10:47: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 12:00:09AM -0500, Mike Leone wrote: > > /boot 30M (room to test many kernels :-) > > Perhaps Debian (and, thus, Libranet) is more sane in its /boot > usage, but I've found anything less than about 50M to be mighty > narrow under Red Hat 7.3. (Bebopping along fine, use RHN to update > the kernel, have it fail because it can't fit things in and doesn't > know to recycle the once-out-of-date kernels.) > > I mean, c'mon, you've got 60 GB, is it really gonna hurt you to > leave room to tinker in there? :-) No. However, I never (or never used to) get binary-only kernels. Always compiled my own from source. Right now, I have 4 kernels in there now, and it's using 8M of the 30M. And yeah, at least 2 are out of date. > > /opt 2G (in case something likes to install in there) > > What's wrong with sym-linking it to /usr/local? That way your local > software space is all allocated in the same space. A good point. > > /tmp 2G > > Gee, I sure wish Linux tmpfs worked like it does under Solaris, > sharing virtual memory with /tmp. Oh well. > > > /var 4G > > Seems reasonable. > > > /usr 12G > > Does /usr really need that much, or is it just going to end up being > wasted space? Sure, you might hit 12 GB if you installed even half > of all the available Debian packages... but do you really need every > web browser packaged for Debian? I doubt it... > > (I'd stuff 6 more GBs in /home, if I were you. But you know your > usage better than I.) I just might. Right now, I'm not even at 3G in /usr. So 6G is probably much more than enough. > > Have a missed anything? Is there any other standard directory that should be > > on it's own partition? /usr/local/src or whatever (that's just an example) > > Oddly enough, I've been thinking through stuff like this a bit > myself lately. Here's my general thinking on my own situation laid > out. I don't think it'll change anything you're doing, but I've seen > this "what should I think about when partitioning a new disk" roll > past a few times, and I've got some notes sitting right here I can > spruce up into prose quickly, so I'll throw this out there. > > On my main machine (NetBSD, but the basic idea applies), df -k > (no, NetBSD's df(1) doesn't have a -h, it's a political issue I'd > rather not go into) says: > > /dev/sd0a 1016951 500810 465293 51% / > /dev/sd0g 506893 44905 436643 9% /var > /dev/sd0e 4571908 3831471 511841 88% /usr > /dev/sd0f 2017206 989216 927129 51% /home > /dev/wd0a 130104846 33362996 90236607 26% /music > /dev/wd1a 38701490 36740896 25519 99% /forty <snip> > *Definitely* more than you needed to know... No argument. :-) But probably valuable, anyway. -- PGP Fingerprint: 0AA8 DC47 CB63 AE3F C739 6BF9 9AB4 1EF6 5AA5 BCDF Member, LEAF Project <http://leaf.sourceforge.net> AIM: MikeLeone Public Key - <http://www.mike-leone.com/~turgon/turgon-public-key.asc> Registered Linux user# 201348 Attachment:
pgp2VrjfyxgYQ.pgp
|
|