>On Sun, 30 Mar 2014 14:57:22 -0700
>Al Szymanski wrote:
>
> Thank you all for your rapid responses. In specific, Aleksandar asked:
> > Are these numbers your own estimates, or did you pick them up
> > somewhere? I'm asking because they overestimate.
>
> These numbers came directly from the 7.5
On Sun, 2014-03-30 at 18:14 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
> > /usr : A separate /usr is a very old idea. Useful if you are on a
> > network where /usr is an nfs mount shared by several machines. I'm
> > sure there are other use cases, but I can't think of any at the
> > moment. F
Bruce and Ken. Thank you very much for your well thought out responses.
1. Where I got the 80Gig minimum is simply adding up the suggested partitions
from the 7.5 book.
Since I've never built a system from scratch ( except a version of
CPM... back in the day), I find that I am doing a lo
Ken Moffat wrote:
> I think we are all following Al in asking the wrong question ;-)
> Surely, the first question ought to be "What partitions will suit
> _my_ usage ?".
I agree.
> In my own builds, /sources is an nfs mount (and it contains in
> excess of 20GB : I pruned it last week, but it
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 11:44:19PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
>
> swap : yes. The traditional theory was 2 x physical memory, but I
> might go with more than that if physical memory is small (e.g. <=
> 4GB). On what is now a small disk I would not go overboard with the
> swap.
>
I managed to com
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 11:31:59PM +0200, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
> >On Sun, 30 Mar 2014 14:05:50 -0700
> >Al Szymanski wrote:
> >
> > I am just trying to figure out the overall smallest size of hard
> > drive space needed for all of the partitions. My sums from the 7.5
> > book come to 80 Gig pl
Thank you all for your rapid responses. In specific, Aleksandar asked:
> Are these numbers your own estimates, or did you pick them up
> somewhere? I'm asking because they overestimate.
These numbers came directly from the 7.5 book; 2.2.1.1. through 2.2.1.3 : pages
12 and 13.
On a related topic
>On Sun, 30 Mar 2014 14:05:50 -0700
>Al Szymanski wrote:
>
> I am just trying to figure out the overall smallest size of hard
> drive space needed for all of the partitions. My sums from the 7.5
> book come to 80 Gig plus whatever space I want for /home .
> [ suggested partition sizes:
> ro
Al Szymanski wrote:
> I am just trying to figure out the overall smallest size of hard drive space
> needed for all of the partitions.
> My sums from the 7.5 book come to 80 Gig plus whatever space I want for /home
> .
>
> [ suggested partition sizes:
> root LFS 10Gig
/usr/src 30
Le 30/03/2014 23:05, Al Szymanski a écrit :
> I am just trying to figure out the overall smallest size of hard drive space
> needed for all of the partitions.
> My sums from the 7.5 book come to 80 Gig plus whatever space I want for /home
> .
>
> [ suggested partition sizes:
> root LFS 10G
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 11:05 PM, Al Szymanski wrote:
>
> So... how small a drive can I do LFS with? Thanks and I hope to not be a
> bother in the future.
I only compile text mode tools (no graphics) and working system uses
about 1-2 GB of root partition, but I use 10 Gb disk to build initial
s
I am just trying to figure out the overall smallest size of hard drive space
needed for all of the partitions.
My sums from the 7.5 book come to 80 Gig plus whatever space I want for /home .
[ suggested partition sizes:
root LFS 10Gig/usr/src 30-50Gig /opt 5-10Gig /usr 5Gig
12 matches
Mail list logo
