Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:50, Torbjorn Pettersson wrote:
> > /boot : Sector sizes and such already discussed, you will
> > discover that you need a separate boot, and then it
> > will be to late. You are not talking about wasing space
> > her
Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:50, Torbjorn Pettersson wrote:
> > /boot : Sector sizes and such already discussed, you will
> > discover that you need a separate boot, and then it
> > will be to late. You are not talking about wasing space
> > he
On Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:50, Torbjorn Pettersson wrote:
> /boot : Sector sizes and such already discussed, you will
>discover that you need a separate boot, and then it
>will be to late. You are not talking about wasing space
>here either, it can be really small, but you will
On Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:50, Torbjorn Pettersson wrote:
> /boot : Sector sizes and such already discussed, you will
>discover that you need a separate boot, and then it
>will be to late. You are not talking about wasing space
>here either, it can be really small, but you will
"Kevin J. Menard, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hey guys (and gals),
>
> I'm redoing a machine of mine. Was a Mandrake system, but now it's going
> to
> be a debian one ;)
>
> Basically, I have 20 gigs of space to tinker with (well, there's really 40
> there, but I run a h
"Kevin J. Menard, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hey guys (and gals),
>
> I'm redoing a machine of mine. Was a Mandrake system, but now it's going to
> be a debian one ;)
>
> Basically, I have 20 gigs of space to tinker with (well, there's really 40
> there, but I run a har
On Wed, 4 Jul 2001 00:26, Christian Hammers wrote:
> > If your root file system is at the start then it is unlikely to be
> > large enough to break any boot loaders. Recent boot loaders are very
> > capable...
>
> fill it up to more than 512MB (was it that number?) and then compile a
> new kernel
On Wed, 4 Jul 2001 00:26, Christian Hammers wrote:
> > If your root file system is at the start then it is unlikely to be
> > large enough to break any boot loaders. Recent boot loaders are very
> > capable...
>
> fill it up to more than 512MB (was it that number?) and then compile a
> new kernel
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 12:26:46AM +0200, Christian Hammers wrote:
> I use 2.4.6-pre7 and use LVM,reiserfs and ext3 without problems.
> (maybe my kernel is just too recent...)
>
ext3 has just recently been ported over to kernel 2.4, and you have no
problems you say? (when I say recent, I mean
On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 03:12:31PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> If your root file system is at the start then it is unlikely to be large
> enough to break any boot loaders. Recent boot loaders are very capable...
fill it up to more than 512MB (was it that number?) and then compile a new
kernel y
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 12:26:46AM +0200, Christian Hammers wrote:
> I use 2.4.6-pre7 and use LVM,reiserfs and ext3 without problems.
> (maybe my kernel is just too recent...)
>
ext3 has just recently been ported over to kernel 2.4, and you have no
problems you say? (when I say recent, I mean
On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 03:12:31PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> If your root file system is at the start then it is unlikely to be large
> enough to break any boot loaders. Recent boot loaders are very capable...
fill it up to more than 512MB (was it that number?) and then compile a new
kernel
On Saturday 30 June 2001 17:49, Christian Hammers wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 10:13:33AM -0400, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> > Basically, I have 20 gigs of space to tinker with (well, there's
> > really 40 there, but I run a hardware RAID 10). I also have half a
> > gig of SDRAM (sure th
On Saturday 30 June 2001 17:49, Christian Hammers wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 10:13:33AM -0400, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> > Basically, I have 20 gigs of space to tinker with (well, there's
> > really 40 there, but I run a hardware RAID 10). I also have half a
> > gig of SDRAM (sure t
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 10:13:33AM -0400, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> Basically, I have 20 gigs of space to tinker with (well, there's really 40
> there, but I run a hardware RAID 10). I also have half a gig of SDRAM
> (sure
> this would matter with swap space). Now, I have no prob
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 10:13:33AM -0400, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> Basically, I have 20 gigs of space to tinker with (well, there's really 40
> there, but I run a hardware RAID 10). I also have half a gig of SDRAM (sure
> this would matter with swap space). Now, I have no proble
Hello!
Just to throw a word in too.
Every than and now I have been longing for a small partition with a
minimal system, just with what the Debian Installation Disquette
contains (~ 2 M).
When fsck finds a somewhat bigger problem (my clients and friends seem
like to pull the plug or press that fo
Hello!
Just to throw a word in too.
Every than and now I have been longing for a small partition with a
minimal system, just with what the Debian Installation Disquette
contains (~ 2 M).
When fsck finds a somewhat bigger problem (my clients and friends seem
like to pull the plug or press that f
On Saturday 23 June 2001 21:13, Nick Jennings wrote:
> > However if you have a single large partition then when you are
> > writing data the FS drivers can optimise things.
>
> I always thought that this was a performance hit, I know I've read it
> in places before, but I can't seem to find them a
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 10:19:31AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Friday 22 June 2001 17:46, Duane Powers wrote:
> > on /. I _always_ use a seprarate /home, so I can keep data in case I
> > have to reinstall the OS, (successful intrustion attempt, etc.) and
>
> Of course the re-installation coul
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 09:34:59AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Saturday 23 June 2001 04:10, Nick Jennings wrote:
> >
> > The main performance benefit to having directories reside on their own
> > partition relates to file write/read access. It's very important to
> > have var on it's own sep
On Friday 22 June 2001 17:46, Duane Powers wrote:
> Hm, This is interesting, I have almost always used separate partitions,
> such as /var, and it's saved my butt a couple times. If a log file
> starts to run away, which I've had happen a twice, it can't overflow
> the boundaries of the partition
On Saturday 23 June 2001 21:13, Nick Jennings wrote:
> > However if you have a single large partition then when you are
> > writing data the FS drivers can optimise things.
>
> I always thought that this was a performance hit, I know I've read it
> in places before, but I can't seem to find them
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 10:19:31AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Friday 22 June 2001 17:46, Duane Powers wrote:
> > on /. I _always_ use a seprarate /home, so I can keep data in case I
> > have to reinstall the OS, (successful intrustion attempt, etc.) and
>
> Of course the re-installation cou
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 09:34:59AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Saturday 23 June 2001 04:10, Nick Jennings wrote:
> >
> > The main performance benefit to having directories reside on their own
> > partition relates to file write/read access. It's very important to
> > have var on it's own se
On Friday 22 June 2001 17:46, Duane Powers wrote:
> Hm, This is interesting, I have almost always used separate partitions,
> such as /var, and it's saved my butt a couple times. If a log file
> starts to run away, which I've had happen a twice, it can't overflow
> the boundaries of the partition
On Saturday 23 June 2001 04:10, Nick Jennings wrote:
> > > one and waste space. Do the performance gains outweigh this? (I'm
> > > not terribly worried about the redundancy with the RAID 10 and
> > > all).
> >
> > What performance gains are you referring to?
>
> The main performance benefit to h
On Saturday 23 June 2001 03:35, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> >> I was thinking the other way around actually. If /boot were to get
> >> messed up, it wouldn't affect /.
>
> I guess I'm off here. By getting messed up, I mean more by say a
> sudden jolt in the power supply (of course, I do have a
On Saturday 23 June 2001 04:10, Nick Jennings wrote:
> > > one and waste space. Do the performance gains outweigh this? (I'm
> > > not terribly worried about the redundancy with the RAID 10 and
> > > all).
> >
> > What performance gains are you referring to?
>
> The main performance benefit to
On Saturday 23 June 2001 03:35, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> >> I was thinking the other way around actually. If /boot were to get
> >> messed up, it wouldn't affect /.
>
> I guess I'm off here. By getting messed up, I mean more by say a
> sudden jolt in the power supply (of course, I do have a
On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 03:17:12PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
>
> > looking for help, it will be used as an IMAP/SMTP machine. So, should
> > I create a separate /var partition? I'm hesitant because I don't want
> > to a) not create a large enough partition, or b) create too large of
>
> I sug
Hey Russell,
Friday, June 22, 2001, 7:22:41 PM, you wrote:
>> I was thinking the other way around actually. If /boot were to get
>> messed up, it wouldn't affect /.
I guess I'm off here. By getting messed up, I mean more by say a
sudden jolt in the power supply (of course, I do have a line
co
On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 03:17:12PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
>
> > looking for help, it will be used as an IMAP/SMTP machine. So, should
> > I create a separate /var partition? I'm hesitant because I don't want
> > to a) not create a large enough partition, or b) create too large of
>
> I su
On Friday 22 June 2001 17:33, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> RC> What exactly will that save you from? If the root FS gets messed
> up then RC> having a separate /boot won't gain you much...
>
> I was thinking the other way around actually. If /boot were to get
> messed up, it wouldn't affect /.
Hey Russell,
Friday, June 22, 2001, 7:22:41 PM, you wrote:
>> I was thinking the other way around actually. If /boot were to get
>> messed up, it wouldn't affect /.
I guess I'm off here. By getting messed up, I mean more by say a
sudden jolt in the power supply (of course, I do have a line
c
On Friday 22 June 2001 17:33, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> RC> What exactly will that save you from? If the root FS gets messed
> up then RC> having a separate /boot won't gain you much...
>
> I was thinking the other way around actually. If /boot were to get
> messed up, it wouldn't affect /.
Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
Hey Russell,
Friday, June 22, 2001, 11:07:37 AM, you wrote:
RC> What exactly will that save you from? If the root FS gets messed up then
RC> having a separate /boot won't gain you much...
I was thinking the other way around actually. If /boot were to get messed up,
it
Hey Russell,
Friday, June 22, 2001, 11:07:37 AM, you wrote:
RC> What exactly will that save you from? If the root FS gets messed up then
RC> having a separate /boot won't gain you much...
I was thinking the other way around actually. If /boot were to get messed up,
it wouldn't affect /.
RC>
On Friday 22 June 2001 16:39, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> Friday, June 22, 2001, 9:17:12 AM, you wrote:
>
> RC> On Friday 15 June 2001 16:13, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> >> This system would be used mostly for web-hosting, so I was
> >> figuring a large /home partition. Likewise only one o
Hey Russell,
Friday, June 22, 2001, 9:17:12 AM, you wrote:
RC> On Friday 15 June 2001 16:13, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
>> This system would be used mostly for web-hosting, so I was figuring
>> a large /home partition. Likewise only one or two kernels max, so I
>> figured a small /boot. A
Hey Russell,
Friday, June 22, 2001, 9:17:12 AM, you wrote:
RC> On Friday 15 June 2001 16:13, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
>> This system would be used mostly for web-hosting, so I was figuring
>> a large /home partition. Likewise only one or two kernels max, so I
>> figured a small /boot. A
On Friday 15 June 2001 16:13, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> This system would be used mostly for web-hosting, so I was figuring
> a large /home partition. Likewise only one or two kernels max, so I
> figured a small /boot. And finally, and this is really where I'm
Why do you need a separate
Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> Hey Russell,
>
>
> Friday, June 22, 2001, 11:07:37 AM, you wrote:
>
> RC> What exactly will that save you from? If the root FS gets messed up then
> RC> having a separate /boot won't gain you much...
>
> I was thinking the other way around actually. If /boot we
Hey Russell,
Friday, June 22, 2001, 11:07:37 AM, you wrote:
RC> What exactly will that save you from? If the root FS gets messed up then
RC> having a separate /boot won't gain you much...
I was thinking the other way around actually. If /boot were to get messed up,
it wouldn't affect /.
RC>
On Friday 22 June 2001 16:39, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> Friday, June 22, 2001, 9:17:12 AM, you wrote:
>
> RC> On Friday 15 June 2001 16:13, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> >> This system would be used mostly for web-hosting, so I was
> >> figuring a large /home partition. Likewise only one
Hey Russell,
Friday, June 22, 2001, 9:17:12 AM, you wrote:
RC> On Friday 15 June 2001 16:13, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
>> This system would be used mostly for web-hosting, so I was figuring
>> a large /home partition. Likewise only one or two kernels max, so I
>> figured a small /boot.
Hey Russell,
Friday, June 22, 2001, 9:17:12 AM, you wrote:
RC> On Friday 15 June 2001 16:13, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
>> This system would be used mostly for web-hosting, so I was figuring
>> a large /home partition. Likewise only one or two kernels max, so I
>> figured a small /boot.
On Friday 15 June 2001 16:13, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> This system would be used mostly for web-hosting, so I was figuring
> a large /home partition. Likewise only one or two kernels max, so I
> figured a small /boot. And finally, and this is really where I'm
Why do you need a separate
Hello Kevin,
> should I create a separate /var
Yes, you most definitely should. IMHO, whatever config you're going for,
logs reside in /var by default in all the linux distros I've tried
> used mostly for web-hosting
> used as an IMAP/SMTP machine
In your case, given that mail would resides by
Hello Kevin,
> should I create a separate /var
Yes, you most definitely should. IMHO, whatever config you're going for,
logs reside in /var by default in all the linux distros I've tried
> used mostly for web-hosting
> used as an IMAP/SMTP machine
In your case, given that mail would resides by
Hey guys (and gals),
I'm redoing a machine of mine. Was a Mandrake system, but now it's going to
be a debian one ;)
Basically, I have 20 gigs of space to tinker with (well, there's really 40
there, but I run a hardware RAID 10). I also have half a gig of SDRAM (sure
this wou
Hey guys (and gals),
I'm redoing a machine of mine. Was a Mandrake system, but now it's going to
be a debian one ;)
Basically, I have 20 gigs of space to tinker with (well, there's really 40
there, but I run a hardware RAID 10). I also have half a gig of SDRAM (sure
this wo
52 matches
Mail list logo
