On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:50:33 +0000 "Benjamen R. Meyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I set up a server system a little while ago, and in performing updates > to portage it ran out of disk space as I didn't quite allow enough > space on the root partition (3.8 GB). As a result, I took a partition > that I had cleaned up (this was from a rebuild of a system that was a > different distro in the past) and moved over /usr/portage to it. It's > a 47 GB partition (as reported by df -h) and the system works fine. 47 Gigs is quite a lot of space for the portage tree. The ebuilds take up a few hundred megabytes, and the distfiles generally fill up a few gigs by the time you get everything installed (i recommend you keep them around, if you plan to share portage with others). The amount of space you provide is overkill -- but more importantly, I worry that you may need to reclaim some of that 47GB to use for your root partition, as 3.8GB isn't a particularly large amount for this, especially if you have /var on that partition as well. I generally go 5 or 10 gigs for a root partition, the latter being more appropriate for a general purpose graphical workstation. My shared portage tree has been deployed for quite a while now and is about 5.4 gigs, with roughly 5G of that accounted for by distfiles. > I am now thinking of converting my desktop over to Gentoo as well, and > was wondering whether what I did above on the server was wise or not. > I will be using the server as the portage provider for my desktop too. > Otherwise, what is the recommended space to have available for the > portage tree in /usr/portage so I can have root as an appropriately > sized partition? I believe that sharing portage between computers is wise whenever the client is guaranteed to have access to the tree when new programs are required. In other words, it works great for desktops. The configuration might come back to haunt you if you are off your own network and need to install a new program on your laptop. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
