David Wright composed on 2019-01-04 10:19 (UTC-0600): > On Fri 04 Jan 2019 at 04:30:00 (-0500), Felix Miata wrote:
>>> This partitioning scheme seems really odd and unwieldy. >> Indeed. Considering the absence of a sysadmin, > What's so unusual about that? Standing alone, absolutely nothing, but it wasn't standing alone.... >> absence of 2 possible primary partitions on sda, > If the OP partitioned an MBR disk intending to subdivide the > filesystem, then it might be expected that they create an extended > partition. Why bother with holding off until you've got two > primary partitions set up first? Off the top of my head: 1-trivial I know, but avoiding seeing fdisk report "Partition table entries are not in disk order" 2-less trivial: partitions not being in disk order 3-potential to have a primary partition added following a logical, thereby making following freespace unavailable for one or more added logicals (disappearing freespace). >> and the absence of sda6, > I assume that's swap. Yes, but: # df -hl Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda1 23G 23G 0 100% / /dev/sda2 ? extended (presumably) /dev/sda5 9.2G 6.0G 2.8G 69% /var /dev/sda6 ? ? ? swap /dev/sda7 1.9G 6.5M 1.7G 1% /tmp /dev/sda8 416G 103G 292G 27% /home ?freespace? ? Where is the logic responsible for the original allocations? Would any Debian Installer have done it without intervention from the admin? It looks like the work of a naive admin. Yet, OP claimed "I haven't messed around with partitioning since the early days of Slackware, and that was with a great deal of trepidation". > ...but the OP would become a better sysadmin by learning something during the > cleanup. Indeed! -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
