On Wed 01 Mar 2023 at 19:53:09 (+0000), Andy Smith wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 07:53:19PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote: > I was talking about them going to the effort of separating /home and > /var and ending up with completely inappropriate sizings. They would > have been much better off just not bothering and having it all in /. > The mere presence of all these other partitions laid out on this > disk after the one for / makes resizing things a lot harder than it > needs to be.
I always keep /home separate from the root filesystem(s). It makes upgrading more flexible (in-place vs reinstall), and I also typically encrypt /home. > > On the other hand, in 2023, it is still a very good idea to separate the > > system filesystem that gets written frequently from the one that gets > > written rarely from the user data filesystem. > > No argument there, but not with disk partitions as they end up hard > to resize, as seen here. OP is quite fortunate that their last > partition is one that can be most easily shrunk as that at least > gives them some easier options. I'd agree it would be a better > example of a tight spot if their last partition were one they > couldn't shrink! I don't understand why being the last partition matters. The partition shouldn't be aware of your shrinking and growing the filesystem within it, and the partitioner should be able to repartition a disk without being aware of the contents of the sectors themselves. (Mind you, I don't partition disks in units of GB, but always sectors, and I keep a sector listing of the partitions in the disk's log.) Cheers, David.