On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 09:40:01AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Stephen Powell put forth on 3/17/2010 8:20 AM:
> > On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:12:49 -0400 (EDT), Aioanei Rares wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all, I have a HDD (the only one, in fact) with the following layout ,
> >> as reported by df :
> >>
> >> /
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:40:01 -0400 (EDT), Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Stephen Powell put forth on 3/17/2010 8:20 AM:
>> On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:12:49 -0400 (EDT), Aioanei Rares wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all, I have a HDD (the only one, in fact) with the following layout ,
>>> as reported by df :
>>>
>>> /dev/sd
>>> You're worried that that a mass renaming of partition numbers will
>>> cause your system to not reboot? That's why LABEL and UUID are now
>>> used in grub (lilo is restricted to device names) and fstab.
>> Call me a luddite but UUID < partition numbers for the simple reason
>> I can manually w
> Hi all, I have a HDD (the only one, in fact) with the following layout , as
> reported by df :
> /dev/sda2 99G 886M 93G 1% /
> /dev/sda1 2.0G 170M 1.8G 9% /boot
> /dev/sda5 345G 232G 96G 71% /home
> /dev/sda8 29G 172M 27G 1% /tm
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:20:36 -0400 (EDT), Stephen Powell wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:12:49 -0400 (EDT), Aioanei Rares wrote:
>>
>> Hi all, I have a HDD (the only one, in fact) with the following layout ,
>> as reported by df :
>>
>> /dev/sda2 99G 886M 93G 1% /
>> /dev/sda1
Stephen Powell put forth on 3/17/2010 8:20 AM:
> On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:12:49 -0400 (EDT), Aioanei Rares wrote:
>>
>> Hi all, I have a HDD (the only one, in fact) with the following layout ,
>> as reported by df :
>>
>> /dev/sda2 99G 886M 93G 1% /
>> /dev/sda1 2.0G 1
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:12:49 -0400 (EDT), Aioanei Rares wrote:
>
> Hi all, I have a HDD (the only one, in fact) with the following layout ,
> as reported by df :
>
> /dev/sda2 99G 886M 93G 1% /
> /dev/sda1 2.0G 170M 1.8G 9% /boot
> /dev/sda5 345G 23
Steve Lamb wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>> You're worried that that a mass renaming of partition numbers will
>> cause your system to not reboot? That's why LABEL and UUID are now
>> used in grub (lilo is restricted to device names) and fstab.
>
> Call me a luddite but UUID < partition numbers
On 2010-03-16 17:04, Steve Lamb wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
You're worried that that a mass renaming of partition numbers will
cause your system to not reboot? That's why LABEL and UUID are now
used in grub (lilo is restricted to device names) and fstab.
Call me a luddite but UUID < partit
Ron Johnson wrote:
You're worried that that a mass renaming of partition numbers will cause
your system to not reboot? That's why LABEL and UUID are now used in
grub (lilo is restricted to device names) and fstab.
Call me a luddite but UUID < partition numbers for the simple reason I
can
On 2010-03-16 16:12, Aioanei Rares wrote:
Hi all, I have a HDD (the only one, in fact) with the following layout ,
as reported by df :
/dev/sda2 99G 886M 93G 1% /
/dev/sda1 2.0G 170M 1.8G 9% /boot
/dev/sda5 345G 232G 96G 71% /home
/dev/sda8
Hi all, I have a HDD (the only one, in fact) with the following layout ,
as reported by df :
/dev/sda2 99G 886M 93G 1% /
/dev/sda1 2.0G 170M 1.8G 9% /boot
/dev/sda5 345G 232G 96G 71% /home
/dev/sda8 29G 172M 27G 1% /tmp
/dev/sda
12 matches
Mail list logo