> > 2) Click "Create" => choose "/dev/dasda" => choose "Do not format" =>
> > enter all blanks for "Mount point" (I see now that the last entry in
the
> > dropdown menu is "blanks" - aha - the hidden key :)).
> >
> This is what I've always done. If you want to give a partition to LVM,
you have to
David Boyes wrote:
While it's a bit heavy-handed to write it into the spec, it is a grand
attempt to put Mother's First Law (thou shalt not mix your stuff with
vendor stuff) into the general consciousness. If it becomes customary,
we can get people to keep code and data separate (I find the usua
> I was speaking to its merit overall, without regard to whether to make
> it separate or not. I find it to be among the more sophomoric
additions
> to the LSB in general and the FHS in particular.
While it's a bit heavy-handed to write it into the spec, it is a grand
attempt to put Mother's First
> / is also intended to contain other stuff, the binaries you need to
get
> things working well enough to find everything else, the libraries they
> require, the kernel modules.
Which for an enterprise deployment on a platform that has limited
choices in hardware should change infrequently and be
Mark;
> Until some webmaster decides to dump a few 4.7GB DVD .iso
> files in it, and your system craters.
I was speaking to its merit overall, without regard to whether to make
it separate or not. I find it to be among the more sophomoric additions
to the LSB in general and the FHS in particular
>>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 5:03 AM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mark Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-snip-
> (What I am looking for is the ability to fall back to a point in time
> for one or more files or a complete filesystem, without involving
> complicated & time-consuming backup/restor
>>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 4:29 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Stricklin, Raymond J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-snip-
> IMO /srv is a waste of effort.
Until some webmaster decides to dump a few 4.7GB DVD .iso files in it, and your
system craters. If I'm not going to be running FTP or HT
>>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 8:19 AM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael
MacIsaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-snip-
> What steps did you take? I found if you leave space on /dev/dasda, then
> click "LVM", that the free space on /dev/dasda would not be available for
> use in a volume group.
-sn
Mark Perry wrote:
David Boyes wrote:
I guess I'm missing something here. If you split out all the
subsidiary filesystems, what ever changes in / other than the atime of
the mount points for the other filesystems? You don't WANT stuff in /,
and restoring / is a few seconds work if all the real wo
Mark;
> For all you folks out there that keep wanting to put / in an
> LV, all I can say is "masochists." I keep /boot in the root
> file system, and break out everything else.
> # df -h
> FilesystemSize Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/dasda1 388M 125M 243M 35% /
>
> While /etc's overmounted is it still possible to update the underlying
> /etc/fstab and make other needed config changes?
You can mount the "base" /etc at another point in the tree and edit,
although the point of the setup I want is that you never have to
(substitute minidisks at the correct add
ystem.
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David Boyes
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 10:43 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: What is a good generic disk layout?
> "/" will typically include "/etc" and then many sub
> Yes that's a really good idea - using a bind mount from another
> filesystem in the LVM2 ?
> something like:
> mount --bind /etc /origetc
> mount --bind /newetc /etc
> Where /origetc is simply a mountpoint in the root filesystem (to be
able
> to maintain /etc after the next mount)
> and /newetc i
David Boyes wrote:
"/" will typically include "/etc" and then many subdirectories below
it.
Ah. I overmount that as early as possible, which cures many evils (and
leaves a very nice fallback system if something fails in startup; you
just fall back to "nothing enabled" with a r/o root). But, st
> "/" will typically include "/etc" and then many subdirectories below
it.
Ah. I overmount that as early as possible, which cures many evils (and
leaves a very nice fallback system if something fails in startup; you
just fall back to "nothing enabled" with a r/o root). But, still, that's
seldom mo
David Boyes wrote:
I guess I'm missing something here. If you split out all the subsidiary
filesystems, what ever changes in / other than the atime of the mount points
for the other filesystems? You don't WANT stuff in /, and restoring / is a few
seconds work if all the real work is in the sub
T.EDU"
Sent: 4/9/08 5:05 AM
Subject: Re: What is a good generic disk layout?
Mark Post wrote:
>
> For all you folks out there that keep wanting to put / in an LV, all I can
> say is "masochists." I keep /boot in the root file system, and break out
> everything else.
&
Mark,
> It's always worked fine for me.
> I just went through a new SP1 install on my test
What steps did you take? I found if you leave space on /dev/dasda, then
click "LVM", that the free space on /dev/dasda would not be available for
use in a volume group.
> system, just to make sure nothing h
Mark Post wrote:
For all you folks out there that keep wanting to put / in an LV, all I can say is
"masochists." I keep /boot in the root file system, and break out everything
else.
Mark,
I have always agreed with your point of view, but even I am considering
using "/" in an LV to be able t
>>> On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 10:06 AM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brad Hinson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-snip-
> We're considering this layout due to some difficulty we had in the SLES
> installer. Ideally, we'd like a 3338 cylinder 100 disk with /boot (ext3
> filesystem) and the remaining sp
nt: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 10:06 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: What is a good generic disk layout?
Hi all,
Just a followup question (Mike and I are working together on this):
We're considering this layout due to some difficulty we had in the SLES
installer. Ideally, we'
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
RPN01
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 1:36 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: What is a good generic disk layout?
We're using the following layout:
Allocate the following disks to the
We're using the following layout:
Allocate the following disks to the Linux guest:
* 124 cylinders minimum as device num 391, used as /boot
* 10016 cylinders minimum as device num 392, used as vg_system.
* 10016 cylinders minimum as device num 393, used as vg_local
* ?? cylinders
feway Inc
925 951 4184
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Michael MacIsaac
> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 8:12 AM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: What is a good generic disk layout?
>
> > X
stall, however the person that did the install told me
he had to use X11.
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Rich Smrcina
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 7:24 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: What is a good generic disk layout?
At
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Fargusson.Alan
> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 10:42 AM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: What is a good generic disk layout?
>
>
> Some products can only be in
esday, April 08, 2008 7:24 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: What is a good generic disk layout?
At first glance, looks nice... but,
X and a graphical desktop? Should we be encouraging this? Or does the
speed of the z10 make it a moot point? Will 10, 100 or 1000 KDE
desktops on a z10 m
On Apr 8, 2008, at 9:45 AM, Romanowski, John (OFT) wrote:
can't you make partition1 dasda1 /boot and partition2 dasda2 the PV
for
LVM?
Sub-partitioning DASD on zSeries is really not a very good idea.
If you're running under VM, you've already GOT virtualized disk.
Make /dev/dasda a small /bo
> X and a graphical desktop? Should we be encouraging this?
Installing them and running them are two different things. It's sometimes
nice to have one installed so it can be started only when a graphical
environment is necessary. But you do bring up a good point.
> can't you make partition1 dasd
n 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Brad Hinson
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 10:06 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: What is a good generic disk layout?
Hi all,
Just a followup question (Mike and I are working together on this):
We're considering this layout d
At first glance, looks nice... but,
X and a graphical desktop? Should we be encouraging this? Or does the
speed of the z10 make it a moot point? Will 10, 100 or 1000 KDE
desktops on a z10 matter?
Michael MacIsaac wrote:
Hello list,
It's difficult to come up with a one-size-fits-all disk lay
Hi all,
Just a followup question (Mike and I are working together on this):
We're considering this layout due to some difficulty we had in the SLES
installer. Ideally, we'd like a 3338 cylinder 100 disk with /boot (ext3
filesystem) and the remaining space used for an LVM volume, so 2
partitions
Hello list,
It's difficult to come up with a one-size-fits-all disk layout for Linux.
In the past I've just "punted" and created a single 3390-3-sized root file
system. That often fills up quickly, so most would probably agree that
more space is require. Here is a proposed minidisk layout for two
33 matches
Mail list logo
