On (22/01/04 19:55), Paul Morgan wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 23:57:44 +, Clive Menzies wrote:
> > On (22/01/04 14:31), Paul Morgan wrote:
> >> On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:05:01 +, Clive Menzies wrote:
> >> > I've just reorganised the partitions on a second (Seagate) drive in
> >> > a dual booti
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 23:57:44 +, Clive Menzies wrote:
> On (22/01/04 14:31), Paul Morgan wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:05:01 +, Clive Menzies wrote:
>> > I've just reorganised the partitions on a second (Seagate) drive in
>> > a dual booting Dell Dimension XPS T500 to give more room to /
On (22/01/04 14:31), Paul Morgan wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:05:01 +, Clive Menzies wrote:
> > I've just reorganised the partitions on a second (Seagate) drive in
> > a dual booting Dell Dimension XPS T500 to give more room to /usr
> > (to upgrade from woody to sid).
> >
> > The partition
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:05:01 +, Clive Menzies wrote:
> Hi List
>
> I've just reorganised the partitions on a second (Seagate) drive in
> a dual booting Dell Dimension XPS T500 to give more room to /usr
> (to upgrade from woody to sid).
>
> The partitions I messed with were /home, /usr and t
On Wednesday 04 December 2002 07:15, Rob Weir wrote:
> X has to know about poer events, since it will have to re-initialise
> your video hardware when your machine wakes up again.
Thanx,
that X tells me about such events, where it is actively doing
something as important as re-initialising my har
On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 01:47:37PM +0100, Michael Naumann wrote:
> and -o noatime will only block writing "inode access times".
True, it's not the solution the XFree86 problem, but it does seem to be
an important flag for laptops.
> But once I found out how to stop X from repeatedly telling me th
Chris Tillman wrote:
>
> I have had no problems with ext3 either, nor have I heard of anyone
> having problems, nor is there any bugs open in e2fsprogs. Should we
> just flatly recommend ext3 in the manual? Or maybe something like
>
> Index: partitioning.sgml
> ===
On Friday 29 November 2002 03:24, Matthias Szupryczynski wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-11-29 at 05:40, Michael Naumann wrote:
> > For this very reason, I have ext2. But gkrellm shows me small write
> > peaks every other second. I figured out, that /var/log/XFree86.0.log
> > gets filled with
> > (II) PM Eve
On Fri, 2002-11-29 at 05:40, Michael Naumann wrote:
> For this very reason, I have ext2. But gkrellm shows me small write
> peaks every other second. I figured out, that /var/log/XFree86.0.log
> gets filled with
> (II) PM Event received: Power Status Change
>
> I asked some days ago in a separate
Once upon a time Pigeon said...
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 10:16:11 +, Chris Lale
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >One of my partitions is 8Gb and I have noticed exactly this behaviour.
> >It also takes aeons to mount during boot. Do you think I should convert
> >all my partions to ext3, or just
On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 10:16:11 +, Chris Lale
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Thanks Colin.
>
>Colin Watson wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 04:10:00PM +, Chris Lale wrote:
>>>
>>>I read in the Debian installation manual (v.3.0.24, 24th May 2002
>>>section 6.4) that partitions greater than about
On Thursday 28 November 2002 19:06, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 10:52:14AM -0700, Chris Tillman wrote:
>
> > I have had no problems with ext3 either, nor have I heard of anyone
> > having problems, nor is there any bugs open in e2fsprogs. Should we
> > just flatly recommend ext3
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 10:52:14AM -0700, Chris Tillman wrote:
> I have had no problems with ext3 either, nor have I heard of anyone
> having problems, nor is there any bugs open in e2fsprogs. Should we
> just flatly recommend ext3 in the manual? Or maybe something like
One issue with ext3 (unl
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 02:50:19PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 10:16:11AM +, Chris Lale wrote:
> > Colin Watson wrote:
> > >On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 04:10:00PM +, Chris Lale wrote:
> > >>I read in the Debian installation manual (v.3.0.24, 24th May 2002
> > >>section
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 10:16:11AM +, Chris Lale wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> >On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 04:10:00PM +, Chris Lale wrote:
> >>I read in the Debian installation manual (v.3.0.24, 24th May 2002
> >>section 6.4) that partitions greater than about 6Gb should be avoided.
> >>Does
Thanks Colin.
Colin Watson wrote:
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 04:10:00PM +, Chris Lale wrote:
I read in the Debian installation manual (v.3.0.24, 24th May 2002
section 6.4) that partitions greater than about 6Gb should be avoided.
Does anyone know if this true? If so, why?
They're a bit of
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 19:58:22 +, Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 04:10:00PM +, Chris Lale wrote:
>> Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
>> I read in the Debian installation manual (v.3.0.24, 24th May 2002
>> section 6.4) that partitions greater than about 6Gb should be avo
- Original Message -
From: "Richard Hector" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Debian-User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 5:05 PM
Subject: Re: Partition size
> On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 10:43, Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> > On Wed, 2002-11-
On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 12:52, Mike Dresser wrote:
> On 28 Nov 2002, Richard Hector wrote:
>
> > You could use the linear version, where you just concatenate the
> > partitions together. That shouldn't take any longer to seek over than
> > one big one - each byte is still only in one place.
> >
> >
On 28 Nov 2002, Richard Hector wrote:
> You could use the linear version, where you just concatenate the
> partitions together. That shouldn't take any longer to seek over than
> one big one - each byte is still only in one place.
>
> Richard
Well, wouldn't the raid partition be bigger than 6 gig
On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 10:43, Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 16:39, Mike Dresser wrote:
> > On 27 Nov 2002, Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> >
> > > rather than Linux itself. That said, do you split it into several
> > > partitions and use RAID on them - I can't see that as providing a hint
> >
On 27 Nov 2002, Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> Yes - that was the point I was seeking to make - if we shouldn't go over
> 6 GB/partition, how the heck are we ever going to use the bulk of these
> 80GB+ drives on the market? ;)
13 partitions? :D
Oooh, that's a real lucky number there!
Out of curiosity,
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 16:39, Mike Dresser wrote:
> On 27 Nov 2002, Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
>
> > rather than Linux itself. That said, do you split it into several
> > partitions and use RAID on them - I can't see that as providing a hint
> > of a fraction of the actual disk operation performance ;)
>
On 27 Nov 2002, Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> rather than Linux itself. That said, do you split it into several
> partitions and use RAID on them - I can't see that as providing a hint
> of a fraction of the actual disk operation performance ;)
Erm, raid on the same drive?
I guess if you had a bad sect
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 11:10, Chris Lale wrote:
> Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
>
> > On my 40 GB drive, I went with:
> >
> > / 1 GB
> > swap 1/2 GB
> > /opt 2 GB
> > /usr 8 GB
> > /var 4 GB
> > /home 24 GB
>
> I read in the Debian installation manual (v.3.0.24, 24th M
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 04:10:00PM +, Chris Lale wrote:
> Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> > On my 40 GB drive, I went with:
> >
> > / 1 GB
> > swap1/2 GB
> > /opt2 GB
> > /usr8 GB
> > /var4 GB
> > /home 24 GB
>
> I read in the Debian installation manual (v.3.0.24
> Hi,
> I have woody on my PC and since it's working perfectly I'm thinking about
> removing my other Linuxes (SuSE and Mandrake, there's no more windows;)
> This action will give me two 2GB partitions, so I would like to ask if it's
> better to make larger /home (which is actually 28GB) or if I
Hello Matje,
Am 10:41 2002-11-25 +0100 hat =?iso-8859-2?q?Mat=ECj=20Hausenblas?=
geschrieben:
>
>Hi,
>I have woody on my PC and since it's working perfectly I'm thinking about
>removing my other Linuxes (SuSE and Mandrake, there's no more windows;)
>This action will give me two 2GB partitions, s
Le mer 27/11/2002 à 17:10, Chris Lale a écrit :
> Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
>
> > On my 40 GB drive, I went with:
> >
> > / 1 GB
> > swap 1/2 GB
> > /opt 2 GB
> > /usr 8 GB
> > /var 4 GB
> > /home 24 GB
>
> I read in the Debian installation manual (v.3.0.24, 24th
* Chris Lale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-11-27 17:12]:
>
> I read in the Debian installation manual (v.3.0.24, 24th May 2002
> section 6.4) that partitions greater than about 6Gb should be avoided.
> Does anyone know if this true? If so, why?
>
My partition sizes are:
FilesystemSize
Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> On my 40 GB drive, I went with:
>
> / 1 GB
> swap 1/2 GB
> /opt 2 GB
> /usr 8 GB
> /var 4 GB
> /home 24 GB
I read in the Debian installation manual (v.3.0.24, 24th May 2002
section 6.4) that partitions greater than about 6Gb should be avoided.
Does anyone know if this true?
On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 10:33, David Z Maze wrote:
> Matěj Hausenblas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I have woody on my PC and since it's working perfectly I'm thinking about
> > removing my other Linuxes (SuSE and Mandrake, there's no more windows;)
> > This action will give me two 2GB partitions,
Matěj Hausenblas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have woody on my PC and since it's working perfectly I'm thinking about
> removing my other Linuxes (SuSE and Mandrake, there's no more windows;)
> This action will give me two 2GB partitions, so I would like to ask if it's
> better to make larger
It seems that your file system is smaller than the partition. You can
enlarge or shrink the ext2 file system by resize2fs.
Qian
On Sun, 17 Nov 2002, Jason Bleazard wrote:
> I'm trying to track down why my /var partition is only mounting as half
> the size as reported by fdisk or parted. I'd app
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 04:21:12PM -0700, Simmons-Davis wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to know what some of your opinions are as to what size I should
> make the / partition when I have /usr as a separate Logical Volume Group
> partition.
if you have time to tinker, and are just getting started
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 04:21:12PM -0700, Simmons-Davis wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to know what some of your opinions are as to what size I
> should make the / partition when I have /usr as a separate Logical
> Volume Group partition.
Depends how much you leave in "/". If "/" only has "/et
Some seem to have good reasons for installing on more than one
partition. As of yet, I'm still running from just one root partition and
a swap.
If you ever come up with a good reason for doing it another way, you can
always change it around.
Tom
--
Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PR
I tried setting the size of my root partion at 250, /usr at 150, /var at
100, and swap at 16 (approx. numbers). However, now when I try to install
the default stuff (using the DIALUP-type-system choice in the
installation), I have even less space available for everything than I did
the first time a
38 matches
Mail list logo
