Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 14:03:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Experiences with FreeBSD 9.0-BETA2 Message-ID: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1109261359100.882@multics.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <201109260927.02540.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201109260053.SAA25795@lariat.net> <201109260927.02540.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011, John Baldwin wrote: > On Sunday, September 25, 2011 8:52:37 pm Brett Glass wrote: >> First thing I noticed, when running the new FreeBSD installer from >> a memory stick image, is that disk partitioning was odd. It >> abandoned standard UNIX parlance, calling what are traditionally >> called "slices" partitions. It also diverged from past practice by >> creating one big UFS filesystem rather than the usual separate >> partitions for /, /tmp, /var, /usr. It then made a separate slice >> (to use the traditional terminology) for swap, rather than >> including it in the slice that contained the big file system. This >> seemed odd; if the file system was being lumped together in one >> place, why break out the swap to an entirely separate slice? > > I can't speak to the "one-big-fs" bit (there was another thread long ago about > that). However, as to the partitioning bit, bsdinstall is defaulting to using The question of how to layout and split filesystems was discussed at the filesystems working group of the devsummit at BSDCan this may. (http://wiki.freebsd.org/201105DevSummit/FileSystems down to "Filesystem Layout" near the bottom) Though "one big root" did not garner a huge amount of support, neither were there particularly compelling arguments against it (if I remember correctly). It's certainly easier to write an autopartitioner for, so I don't really blame Nathan for having chosen it initially. -Ben Kaduk
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.GSO.1.10.1109261359100.882>