El mar, 27-03-2012 a las 16:05 -0400, Alec Moskvin escribió: > On Tuesday 27 March 2012 14:34:03, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 20:01 +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 07:49:00PM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > > > I am a bit surprised handbook still doesn't suggest people to create a > > > > separate partition for /usr/portage tree. I remember my first Gentoo > > > > systems had it inside / and that lead to a lot of fragmentation, much > > > > slower "emerge -pvuDN world" (I benchmarked it when I changed my > > > > partitioning scheme to put /usr/portage) separate and a lot of disk > > > > space lost (I remember portage tree reached around 3 GB of disk space > > > > while I am now running with 300MB) > > > > > > > > Could handbook suggest people to put /usr/portage on a different > > > > partition then? The only doubt I have is what filesystem would be better > > > > for it, in my case I am using reiserfs with tail enabled, but maybe you > > > > have other different setups. > > > > > > To be honest, I don't think it is wise to describe it in the Gentoo > > > Handbook > > > just yet. I don't mind having it documented elsewhere, but the separate > > > partition is not mandatory for getting Gentoo up and running. The > > > instructions currently also just give an example partition layout and tell > > > users that different layouts are perfectly possible. > > > > > > We need to take into consideration what is needed (must) for a Gentoo > > > installation, what is seriously recommended (should), what is nice to have > > > (could), etc. And for me, having a separate /usr/portage is a nice-to-have > > > imo. > > > > The partitioning scheme is something that the user needs to decide on > > *before* getting Gentoo up and running. After the user had finished > > installing the operating system, it's too late to inform him about the > > advantages of a separate /usr/portage. > > It does not have to be a separate *physical* partition. It could be set > up as a loop device without any real downsides: > > /usr/portage/tree.ext4 /usr/portage/tree ext4 loop,noatime > 0 0 > > An advantage is that it can be easily resized if necessary. > > > IMHO, chapter 4 of the handbook needs the following changes: > > > > 1. ext4, not ext3, needs to be recommended as the default filesystem. We > > have kernel 3.2 marked stable, there is no need to keep talking about > > ext4 as if it's something experimental. > > > > 2. The handbook should mention that a separate small /usr/portage > > partition can noticeably improve performance for users with a rotational > > hard drive, and that it's not needed for solid-state drives. It should > > also mention that using Gentoo with a separate /usr/portage partition > > will require some additional configuration (such as changing DISTDIR and > > PKGDIR to avoid running out of space). > > > > -Alexandre. > > > > > >
(I think this last reply can complete my replies to this thread for now :)) Looks then that there are several alternatives for portage tree, then, maybe the option would be to add a note to Gentoo Handbook explaining the cons of having portage tree on a standard partition and, then, put a link to a wiki page (for example) where all this alternatives are explained. What do you think about this approach?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
