Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:21:58 +0100 From: Christoph Mallon <christoph.mallon@gmx.de> To: Maksim Yevmenkin <maksim.yevmenkin@gmail.com> Cc: Sean Bruno <sean.bruno@dsl-only.net>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Default FS Layout Too Small? Message-ID: <49A456E6.1040307@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <bb4a86c70902241210nc89cbf8v373da74e5b4f1a09@mail.gmail.com> References: <1235502625.4345.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <49A44878.30707@gmx.de> <bb4a86c70902241210nc89cbf8v373da74e5b4f1a09@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Maksim Yevmenkin schrieb: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Christoph Mallon > <christoph.mallon@gmx.de> wrote: >> Sean Bruno schrieb: >>> I noted that if I choose the auto defaults for my F/S layout, sysinstall >>> will not reserve enough space for root(512MB?). This is just barely >>> enough to recompile and install an updated kernel. Much more than that >>> and the F/S is full. >>> >>> I would assume that the default would be much larger now-a-days. I think >>> a simple doubling to 1G would be sufficient. >>> >>> Comments? >> You are not supposed to compile stuff (or put any other large and often >> changing stuff) on the root fs. > > uhmmm.... i _think_ he is talking about the fact that 512mb root fs is > barely enough to keep /boot/kernel/ and /boot/kernel.old/ together. > surely you agree that keeping previous (working) copy of the kernel is > a "really good idea" when trying out new kernel. i personally have > been bitten by the same problem. spinning hard drives are _really_ big > and cheap those days, so i would say we probably should increase > default root fs size. I have several old kernels on my 256MB / and there is no space problem.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49A456E6.1040307>