Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 17:31:08 -0500 From: Mike Jakubik <mike.jakubik@intertainservices.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: RE: New BSD Installer Message-ID: <1329431468.2054.17.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <092c01cceb40$2dc8f240$895ad6c0$@fisglobal.com> References: <4F355A5B.9080007@rewt.org.uk> <4F35743B.4020302@os2.kiev.ua> <4F37DBA3.7030304@cran.org.uk> <20120213195554.O46120@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <092c01cceb40$2dc8f240$895ad6c0$@fisglobal.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2012-02-14 at 09:43 -0800, Devin Teske wrote: > I'm with you on this one. I really don't like the single-"/" setup. > > > > while booting multiple systems on GPT also seems to require Linux tools. > > > > I don't know whether this move away from BSD traditional filesystem > > partitioning (/, /var, /usr etc) to Linux-style came down from Core On > > High or is just the prerogative of installer-writers? Jordan was both > > the latter and a big part of the former for many years, but I guess > > that's something that can be reverted if people feel to do so. > > > > Maybe a vote should be taken. There's about 12 votes in this office here alone > for putting the partition scheme back the way it was (Colin Percival had a great > formula for determining partition sizes). > You got my vote for the traditional partitioning scheme.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1329431468.2054.17.camel>