Michael J Wenk wrote:
> The reasons you like to
> seperate partitions is due to fsck, and times it takes for a fsck to
> run.
Historically, the reason to use partitions is to protect / (root)
because time was (original AT&T Unix System 5; circa early '90s)
that when root filled up, there was a
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 10:49:21AM -0700, Rod Roark wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 September 2003 10:36 am, Michael J Wenk wrote:
> ...
> > It is bad to have root's homedirectory on /. What I do is move it to
> > /home/root and symlink /root to it.
>
> This would be a problem if /home becomes corrupt and
On Tuesday 23 September 2003 10:36 am, Michael J Wenk wrote:
...
> It is bad to have root's homedirectory on /. What I do is move it to
> /home/root and symlink /root to it.
This would be a problem if /home becomes corrupt and you
need to log in as root to fix it.
Also users should be discourage
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 10:14:06AM -0700, Mark K. Kim wrote:
> Your root is taking up too much space. My primary system uses only 125MB
> in root, even though I don't have a separate /tmp. I'd look into why it's
> so big.
>
> Some ideas:
>1. Unmount everything but root (easier yet, run in si
Your root is taking up too much space. My primary system uses only 125MB
in root, even though I don't have a separate /tmp. I'd look into why it's
so big.
Some ideas:
1. Unmount everything but root (easier yet, run in single-user
mode). See if you got anything in /usr, /tmp, and /var.
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 09:05:41AM -0700, Tim Riley wrote:
> I'm not a Sys-admin -- just a long-time user -- but I like this partition
> mapping
> because /usr, /tmp, and /var are on their own partitions. I see there's plenty
> of
> room in /usr, but / (root) is filled up (yuck).
As a long time
Tim Riley said:
> I'm not a Sys-admin -- just a long-time user -- but I like this
> partition mapping
> because /usr, /tmp, and /var are on their own partitions.
Thanks, Tim. Credit goes to Rod Roark, who taught me some of the finer
points of hard drive setup when he helped me rebuild my desktop
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 08:57:18AM -0700, Rod Roark wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 September 2003 08:48 am, Richard Crawford wrote:
> > I'm trying to install Java onto my server at home so that I can start
> > mucking around with JSP and Tomcat. Unfortunately, the Java SDK refuses
> > to install, telling
Richard Crawford wrote:
> I'm trying to install Java onto my server at home so that I can start
> mucking around with JSP and Tomcat. Unfortunately, the Java SDK refuses
> to install, telling me that I don't have enough disk space. I ran df to
> get the disk usage, and this is what I get:
>
>
You might want to check out GNU Parted and/or QtParted. They allow you to
resize partition without loosing your data. I'd recommend booting off a
Knoppix CD and running QtParted.
Charles
___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.o
On Tuesday 23 September 2003 08:48 am, Richard Crawford wrote:
> I'm trying to install Java onto my server at home so that I can start
> mucking around with JSP and Tomcat. Unfortunately, the Java SDK refuses
> to install, telling me that I don't have enough disk space. I ran df to
> get the disk
I'm trying to install Java onto my server at home so that I can start
mucking around with JSP and Tomcat. Unfortunately, the Java SDK refuses
to install, telling me that I don't have enough disk space. I ran df to
get the disk usage, and this is what I get:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/
# df -h
Filesyste
12 matches
Mail list logo
