Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-05 Thread Paul
On Wed, 5 Jul 2000, Philomena wrote: >Hi, > >My question was a little off the topic - I didn't have the size question - >my question was that I didn't realize that you could setup an install >without a /boot partition, and was wondering how this was done. > >Thx, >philomena My guess would be t

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-05 Thread Michael Holt
Philomena wrote: > > Hi, > > My question was a little off the topic - I didn't have the size question - > my question was that I didn't realize that you could setup an install > without a /boot partition, and was wondering how this was done. > > Thx, > philomena If you just select the "/" part

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-05 Thread Philomena
Hi, My question was a little off the topic - I didn't have the size question - my question was that I didn't realize that you could setup an install without a /boot partition, and was wondering how this was done. Thx, philomena At 11:28 PM 7/5/00 +, you wrote: >Hi there, > >If you insist

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-05 Thread Yatsen Ng
Hi there, If you insist on a separate /boot then around 5 Mb should be quite sufficient (even that is a little bit of overkill!). On Wed, 05 Jul 2000, you wrote: > Hi Denis, > > The /boot partition isn't needed at all in 7.1 ? While I didn't try > otherwise during the install, I thought yo

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-05 Thread Philomena
Hi Denis, The /boot partition isn't needed at all in 7.1 ? While I didn't try otherwise during the install, I thought you would be required to indicate a " / "and " /boot " partition, at a minimum, just that the /boot did not need to be above 1024 cylinders. What would you do during the i

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-05 Thread Denis Havlik
:~>When I installed LM 7.1 I let it set the three LM partition sizes (/, /boot, :~>and swap). Of the 5 GB available, it assigned about 1.4 GB to the /boot :~>partition. Now I've heard that you only need 10 MB for /boot. Am I wasteing :~>1.4 GB? Thanks. AFAIK, there is no need for a /boot in 7.

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-04 Thread Alexander Skwar
On Mon, Jul 03, 2000 at 10:18:09PM -0500, Tom Brinkman wrote: >The kernel source and header rpm's, about 20 mb. The reason I do Ah, you mean the kernel-source.i586.rpm file? I thought you were talking about the unpacked stuff. > I've found a better system monitor that doesn't need lm_senso

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-04 Thread Alexander Skwar
On Tue, Jul 04, 2000 at 02:50:10AM -0700, Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: > FYI last kernel of cooker http://www.linux-mandrake.com/cooker/> > include lm_sensor. Nice! Alexander Skwar -- Homepage: http://www.digitalprojects.com Sichere Mail? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] fuer GnuPG Keys ICQ:

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-04 Thread Chmouel Boudjnah
Tom Brinkman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Biggest mistake is to try and compile a non-Mandrake patched > kernel (eg, from kernel.org) and use it with Mandrake :) FYI last kernel of cooker http://www.linux-mandrake.com/cooker/> include lm_sensor. -- MandrakeSoft Inchttp://www

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-03 Thread Scott Tyson
The /boot partition only needs to be about 15 megs. That is what I set mine to without any problems. *** REPLY SEPARATOR *** On 7/3/2000 at 10:18 PM Tom Brinkman scribbled: >On Mon, 03 Jul 2000, you wrote: >> On Sun, Jul 02, 2000 at 07:52:41AM -0500, Tom Brinkman wrote: >> > i

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-03 Thread Tom Brinkman
On Mon, 03 Jul 2000, you wrote: > On Sun, Jul 02, 2000 at 07:52:41AM -0500, Tom Brinkman wrote: > > it lets you decide what sizes you want. I use 40 for /boot so I > > can save kernel source and headers there. > > Kernel source on a 40 MB partition? Are you sure? My kernel-source RPM has > a i

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-03 Thread Alexander Skwar
On Sun, Jul 02, 2000 at 07:52:41AM -0500, Tom Brinkman wrote: > it lets you decide what sizes you want. I use 40 for /boot so I > can save kernel source and headers there. Kernel source on a 40 MB partition? Are you sure? My kernel-source RPM has a installed size of 68449254 bytes. Or what do

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-03 Thread Alexander Skwar
On Sun, Jul 02, 2000 at 12:59:36AM -0700, Sevatio Octavio wrote: > I haven't installed LM7.1 but a 1.4GB /boot sounds a bit large. Is LM7.1 only using >three partitions? If you let the LM7.1 installer do the partitiong, you'll end up with a /, /usr, /home and SWAP partition. At least that's wh

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-02 Thread Tom Brinkman
On Sun, 02 Jul 2000, you wrote: > When I installed LM 7.1 I let it set the three LM partition sizes (/, /boot, > and swap). Of the 5 GB available, it assigned about 1.4 GB to the /boot > partition. Now I've heard that you only need 10 MB for /boot. Am I wasteing > 1.4 GB? Thanks. 20mb is a

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-02 Thread Mark Weaver
Without a doubt that's a lot of wasted space. -- Mark I love my Linux Box... REASON # 2 ...X-windows is just a suedonym. Registered Linux user # 1299563 On Sun, 2 Jul 2000, Thomas 2 wrote: > When I installed LM 7.1 I let it set the three LM partition sizes (/, /boot, > and sw

Re: [newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-02 Thread Sthitaprajna
On 2 Jul 00, at 0:33, Thomas 2 wrote: > When I installed LM 7.1 I let it set the three LM partition sizes (/, /boot, > and swap). Of the 5 GB available, it assigned about 1.4 GB to the /boot > partition. Now I've heard that you only need 10 MB for /boot. Am I wasteing > 1.4 GB? Thanks. You mo

[newbie] 1.4 GB overkill for /boot?

2000-07-02 Thread Thomas 2
When I installed LM 7.1 I let it set the three LM partition sizes (/, /boot, and swap). Of the 5 GB available, it assigned about 1.4 GB to the /boot partition. Now I've heard that you only need 10 MB for /boot. Am I wasteing 1.4 GB? Thanks. __