From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Oct 24 13: 6:16 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78AED37B401 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 13:06:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk [81.2.69.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3954743E77 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 13:06:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: from happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g9OK6276002233 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:06:02 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from matthew@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: (from matthew@localhost) by happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g9OK5vCQ002232 for freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:05:57 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:05:57 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: how to add space Message-ID: <20021024200557.GA1424@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophi> Mail-Followup-To: Matthew Seaman , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021024093139.00a8df48@mail.host45.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021024093139.00a8df48@mail.host45.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021024125901.00aad960@pop51.bellnet.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021024125901.00aad960@pop51.bellnet.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-14.7 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_02_03, USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_MUTT version=2.41 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 01:16:33PM -0400, pippo@bellnet.ca wrote: > At 03:21 PM 10/24/2002 +0100, you wrote: > > >The easiest thing to do is probably to use some or all of the > >available 4Gb as a new filesystem mounted under /usr. For instance, > >/usr/local might be a good choice. You need to copy the current > >contents of /usr/local onto the new partition, move the old /usr/local > >aside somewhere and mount the new one in it's place: > > > >Assuming the disk partition where you have space is /dev/da2s2 > >something like the following (in single user mode): > > I'm a little foggy about "single user mode" - I'm really the only user on > all my Unix machines, so there is not much of a security or user conflict > problem. The point of single user mode is not that there's just the one user but that absolutely the minimum amount of stuff is running to be able to work at the console: no network, no system daemons, most of the filesystems not mounted. It's a safety thing really. Processes that aren't running won't get upset by you doing drastic things to the machine, neither will they end up writing things in unexpected places or block you from unmounting filesystems or that sort of thing. > I just updated 2 different machines to FBSD 4.7 and vi (in single user > mode) brought up by mergemaster was just plain horrible. So, I'm a little > skeptical on the single user mode. Can you explain a little? > And I am wondering why vi would not work right? ---- more at bottom vi isn't my favourite editor either, but it's well worth persevering with it to the extent that you can make simple edits without too much difficulty. Either that or be careful to always set the EDITOR environment variable. In single user you'll probably also need to: TERM=cons25 ; export TERM for most full screen editors. > Now, this is a little confusing. The original /usr slice would have more > space, but there would be a new /usr/local on another slice... hmmm? ... I > can't quite visualize how that works as that would seem to leave 2 /usr > slices or directories.... What if I were to create another /usr/local > directory on the original /usr? Under unix you can mount a disk or a network share at any point in the filesystem. So as you change directory from /usr to /usr/local you're moving from one disk partition to the other. There's only one /usr partition, ie. a partition mounted at /usr. The filesystem itself hides all of underlying arrangements: to the user it all looks as if it's just one unified space. > I do admit to feeling a little stupid on this... :(( > And how would that affect the files & programs in the /usr/local directory? After going through this whole exercise, all the stuff in /usr/local should work exactly as they did before. If you had some other users and you could make this change without their knowledge, they probably wouldn't notice the next time they logged in. > This whole exercise is to give OpenOffice the 4gb it is asking for for > installation (Wow! I thought Microsoft was a SpaceHog) OpenOffice only takes 4Gb to compile in the worst case --- you might well be able to get away with 2.5Gb. You'll just have to try it and see what happens. Since compiling OpenOffice is your aim, then you might find it more worthwhile to move /usr/ports to the new partition rather than /usr/local. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message