From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 24 20:22:01 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEE89106566B for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 20:22:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from christoph.mallon@gmx.de) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F39048FC1A for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 20:22:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from christoph.mallon@gmx.de) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 24 Feb 2009 20:21:59 -0000 Received: from p54A3E245.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO tron.homeunix.org) [84.163.226.69] by mail.gmx.net (mp046) with SMTP; 24 Feb 2009 21:21:59 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1673122 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/S4tIxMj3SVt31VKb8+3oVJ3WeMK26wnbRcCAchI TPX0zEK/0dj61T Message-ID: <49A456E6.1040307@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:21:58 +0100 From: Christoph Mallon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Maksim Yevmenkin References: <1235502625.4345.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <49A44878.30707@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.64 Cc: Sean Bruno , FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: Default FS Layout Too Small? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 20:22:02 -0000 Maksim Yevmenkin schrieb: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Christoph Mallon > 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.