Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 00:22:18 +0200 From: "Philippe Charnier" <charnier@xp11.frmug.org> To: questions@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: /proc file system is full Message-ID: <199609072222.AAA03852@xp11.frmug.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 07 Sep 1996 09:56:59 PDT." <199609071656.JAA18317@freefall.freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Salut,
>
>From: The ShadowS Know <shadows@whitefang.com>
>/dev/wd0a 63550 42874 15592 73% /
>/dev/wd0s2f 1758174 356486 1261036 22% /usr
>/dev/wd0s2e 59454 2404 52294 4% /var
>procfs 8 8 0 100% /proc
>
>My /usr splice is much bigger so from now on everytime some program
>decides to write to /var/tmp, and in your care /var/tmp/vi.recover i bet
>it realy does it in /usr/tmp since I've made a symbolic link. I'm
>wondering why FreeBSD didnt decide to just put vi.recover in /usr/tmp
>makes more sense to me as its the bigger partition.
>
Because *you* made /usr bigger! my /usr only contains FreeBSD binaries
(no /usr/X11R6/... nor /usr/local/...) so its size is known. I think
that if I were running -release, I should even mount it read-only
after making the man pages. On the other hand, /var contains log files
and /var/crash so lot of free space is needed in case a kernel panic
occurs.
In my case, /var/tmp is *the* candidate for vi.recover.
------ ------
Philippe Charnier charnier@lirmm.fr (smtp)
charnier@xp11.frmug.org (uucp)
``a PC not running FreeBSD is like a venusian with no tentacles''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199609072222.AAA03852>