On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 21:10:02 +0100, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Joel Rees wrote:
>> Bob Proulx wrote:
>> > the disk as physical volumes for lvm. For you I might suggest:
>> >
>> > /dev/sdb1 /boot {256M} /dev/sdb4 extended
>> > {remainder}
>>
>> Why extended? I generally put my LVM partition straight in a DOS
>> primary partition, unless I needed more than three non-LVM partitions
>> for some reason.
>
I sure appreciate everyone's recommendations, even if only for learning
things I was completely ignorant of (e.g. GPT).
What I've done is rebuilt from scratch without any LVM. IMHO LVM is
[a] overkill for my simple system; and [b] lacking in a few key functions.
I might have been able to move the LVM as originally wanted - by turning
off the LVM within gparted, it seemed like it might have worked. It
was estimated that it was going to take over 6 hours, and the system
had already shown some scuff marks, so I did the rebuild.
Initially I kept the root partition (including /boot) separate from /usr.
To my disappointment systemctl still reported that the system was
'degraded', indicating that it had 'failed to start Load Kernel Modules'.
So I merged /usr into the root partition - and now systemctl indicates
that the system is 'running' without any errors. I have the impression
that boot is faster but that will remain unproven since I'm not inclined
to "restore" the system to its split /usr-root partition state. It seems
most likely that splitting /boot and /usr into separate partitions would
not make systemctl (and whatever init process it is hosting) any happier.
I have a 'jessie' computer at work that produces the same error message
and it seems to work just fine (local server, running 24/7) so the
message seems to be fairly insignificant (so far).
Thanks again, all-
Frank
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/m87stb$9i2$1...@dont-email.me
