On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 16:28:29 +0100
Arthur Chance wrote:
> I suspect whoever you were talking to probably has more of a clue
> than I do. As a quick data point, I just ran "portsnap fetch update"
> while another process did a "df /var; sleep 1" loop and /var
> increased by about 30MB at its peak.
On 07/02/10 15:38, Bruce Cran wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 15:04:10 +0100
Arthur Chance wrote:
As a matter of idle curiosity with a bit of education thrown in, why
4GB for /var? The last time I installed a new machine I made / 1GB as
I'd found out from a previous install that 512MB wasn't really
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 15:04:10 +0100
Arthur Chance wrote:
> As a matter of idle curiosity with a bit of education thrown in, why
> 4GB for /var? The last time I installed a new machine I made / 1GB as
> I'd found out from a previous install that 512MB wasn't really
> enough, and then decided to mak
Arthur Chance writes:
> As a matter of idle curiosity with a bit of education thrown in,
> why 4GB for /var? The last time I installed a new machine I made
> / 1GB as I'd found out from a previous install that 512MB wasn't
> really enough, and then decided to make /var bigger than the
> Handb
On 07/02/10 13:13, Bruce Cran wrote:
I have a task on my TODO list to increase the sizes of the partitions in
sysinstall: for example / goes to 1GB, /var to 4GB. I hope to commit
the code in the next couple of weeks.
As a matter of idle curiosity with a bit of education thrown in, why 4GB
for
On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 02:29:54PM -0700, Ed Flecko wrote:
> Henrik,
> When I FIRST installed 8.0, I did create a separate /home partition.
> When I installed the kernel and starting running out of space in / , I
> thought "O.K...I'll let FreeBSD make the partition sizes IT wants to
> and see if I
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 08:33:45 +0100
Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Is it time for me to start advocating "one big partition" again?
>
> This may not be the consensus view, but I have found that for a quiet
> life and general lack of botheration it helps to create *only two*
> partitions on your hard dri
krad writes:
> all i can say is your a brave boy 8) A 1 TB+ / slice would take
> ages to fsck.
For "ages" being less than ten (fifteen ?) minutes on a modern
system with reasonable memory ...
... which should be necessary very rarely. Even on my test
system, time between involu
On 2 July 2010 08:33, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 01/07/2010 22:29:54, Ed Flecko wrote:
> > Henrik,
> > When I FIRST installed 8.0, I did create a separate /home partition.
> > When I installed the kernel and starting running out of space in / , I
On 02.07.2010 09:33, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 01/07/2010 22:29:54, Ed Flecko wrote:
>> Henrik,
>> When I FIRST installed 8.0, I did create a separate /home partition.
>> When I installed the kernel and starting running out of space in / , I
>> thought "O.K...I'll let FreeBSD make the partition si
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/07/2010 22:29:54, Ed Flecko wrote:
> Henrik,
> When I FIRST installed 8.0, I did create a separate /home partition.
> When I installed the kernel and starting running out of space in / , I
> thought "O.K...I'll let FreeBSD make the partition size
On Jul 01 12:29, Chip Camden wrote:
> On Jul 01 12:07, Ed Flecko wrote:
> > Thanks guys.
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > Doesn't that seem odd that the "default" partition size for root
> > (512M) isn't quite big enough?
> >
> > Should I make the partition size slightly larger (on future installs)
> > to el
Henrik Hudson writes:
> > Or just make one large partition. Not on a server, but I don't
> > see much reason for using multiple partitions on a laptop.
>
> Multiple partitions still isn't a bad idea if you ever have to
> fsck and even on a desktop / laptop I usually mount /tmp as
> noexe
Henrik,
When I FIRST installed 8.0, I did create a separate /home partition.
When I installed the kernel and starting running out of space in / , I
thought "O.K...I'll let FreeBSD make the partition sizes IT wants to
and see if I have the same problem, and I did.
Apparently, 512M is just, not, qui
On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 12:07:50PM -0700, Ed Flecko wrote:
> Thanks guys.
>
> :-)
>
> Doesn't that seem odd that the "default" partition size for root
> (512M) isn't quite big enough?
>
> Should I make the partition size slightly larger (on future installs)
> to eliminate this problem?
Many pe
On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 11:24:46AM -0700, Ed Flecko wrote:
> Hi folks,
> I'm running FreeBSD 8.0, and I'm trying to simple stay current with
> all security patches. It's a clean install of FreeBSD 8.0 on a 50G
> drive, and I let sysinstall select the default partition configuration
> when I did th
On Thu, 01 Jul 2010, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
> Chip Camden writes:
>
> > On Jul 01 12:07, Ed Flecko wrote:
> >> Thanks guys.
> >>
> >> :-)
> >>
> >> Doesn't that seem odd that the "default" partition size for root
> >> (512M) isn't quite big enough?
> >>
> >> Should I make the partition size sl
On 1 July 2010 21:12, Ed Flecko wrote:
> Since it would be smart to have at least one known, good kernel, why
> not make the / partition maybe 1G?
>
> I know the smaller the / partition, the better the performance (since
> it's the first partition of the drive), but I can't imagine a slightly
> l
Since it would be smart to have at least one known, good kernel, why
not make the / partition maybe 1G?
I know the smaller the / partition, the better the performance (since
it's the first partition of the drive), but I can't imagine a slightly
larger / partition would impact performance that much
>
> A healthy fear, indeed.
>
> For one thing, I'd certainly rather have someone
> do "rm /boot/kernel.old/*.ko" than "rm -r /boot/kernel.old".
>
> Being even more selective is an obvious extension...
>
Why not move the old "useless" kernel to another drive. Sure if the system
kernel fails and you
Chip Camden writes:
> On Jul 01 12:07, Ed Flecko wrote:
>> Thanks guys.
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Doesn't that seem odd that the "default" partition size for root
>> (512M) isn't quite big enough?
>>
>> Should I make the partition size slightly larger (on future installs)
>> to eliminate this problem?
>
Chip Camden writes:
> On Jul 01 15:10, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
>> Chip Camden writes:
>>
>> > I've experienced the same thing on amd64 -- the default partition size
>> > for root is too small. Rather than going to the trouble of correcting
>> > it, I just 'rm -r /boot/kernel.old' when it fails a
On Jul 01 12:07, Ed Flecko wrote:
> Thanks guys.
>
> :-)
>
> Doesn't that seem odd that the "default" partition size for root
> (512M) isn't quite big enough?
>
> Should I make the partition size slightly larger (on future installs)
> to eliminate this problem?
>
> Ed
>
On Jul 01 15:10, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
> Chip Camden writes:
>
> > I've experienced the same thing on amd64 -- the default partition size
> > for root is too small. Rather than going to the trouble of correcting
> > it, I just 'rm -r /boot/kernel.old' when it fails and then redo 'make
> > instal
Try rm -r /boot/kernel.old
I bet that's the problem.
--
James Bailie
http://www.mammothcheese.ca
-Original Message-
From: Ed Flecko
Sender: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 11:24:46
To:
Subject: /boot is full after running "make installkernel"
Chip,
That sounds like a smart thing to do; can you tell me more about how
to do that (or point me to a www resource; I'm happy to read more
about that).
:-)
Ed
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/fre
Chip Camden writes:
> I've experienced the same thing on amd64 -- the default partition size
> for root is too small. Rather than going to the trouble of correcting
> it, I just 'rm -r /boot/kernel.old' when it fails and then redo 'make
> installkernel', and all seems OK.
That's a little danger
Thanks guys.
:-)
Doesn't that seem odd that the "default" partition size for root
(512M) isn't quite big enough?
Should I make the partition size slightly larger (on future installs)
to eliminate this problem?
Ed
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mail
On Jul 01 11:24, Ed Flecko wrote:
> Hi folks,
> I'm running FreeBSD 8.0, and I'm trying to simple stay current with
> all security patches. It's a clean install of FreeBSD 8.0 on a 50G
> drive, and I let sysinstall select the default partition configuration
> when I did the install.
>
> I've taken
Hi folks,
I'm running FreeBSD 8.0, and I'm trying to simple stay current with
all security patches. It's a clean install of FreeBSD 8.0 on a 50G
drive, and I let sysinstall select the default partition configuration
when I did the install.
I've taken the following steps:
# csup -4 /etc/stable-su
30 matches
Mail list logo
