From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 19 13:21:12 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2A9416A4CE for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:21:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp.knology.net (smtp.knology.net [24.214.63.101]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8FD4B43D3F for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:21:11 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dkelly@HiWAAY.net) Received: (qmail 17585 invoked by uid 0); 19 Aug 2004 13:21:31 -0000 Received: from user-69-73-60-132.knology.net (HELO ?10.0.0.68?) (69.73.60.132) by smtp5.knology.net with SMTP; 19 Aug 2004 13:21:31 -0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619) In-Reply-To: <007001c485ec$9d3bbb10$3300a8c0@verizon.net> References: <41248C2F.8020401@quadspeed.com> <417F9703-F1DC-11D8-AE79-000393BB56F2@HiWAAY.net> <007001c485ec$9d3bbb10$3300a8c0@verizon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <9FDC1E28-F1E2-11D8-AE79-000393BB56F2@HiWAAY.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: David Kelly Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:21:05 -0500 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619) Subject: Why top-posting is bad X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:21:12 -0000 Providing an introduction to a forwarded message is about the only acceptable time to top-post, as I am doing right now. My pet peeve against top-posters is wonderfully demonstrated this morning when (top-poster) (my edit) failed to read very much of a message he replied to. First, he didn't read enough to know that he was replying to the wrong person. Is not I who is having issues with loss of HD space. Second he didn't read enough to see that tunefs(8) was already listed as a means of reducing the reserved filesystem space. Third he didn't read my .signature. Conclusion: Top-posters don't bother to read. On Aug 19, 2004, at 8:00 AM, (top-poster) wrote: > Actually, this is about right. Sorry... Though people more expert > than I > can suggest cmd parameters which will recover a portion of this > overhead for > you. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Kelly" > To: (not the top-poster) > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 8:35 AM > Subject: Re: Large Disks lose loads of diskspace > > >> >> On Aug 19, 2004, at 6:17 AM, (not the top-poster) wrote: >> >>> I installed 2 new 200gb harddrives lately. Both show up in bios as >>> 200gb, on boot they are shown as 190gb (probably the 1000->1024 >>> conversion), but when I create a filesystem they are only 180gb. >>> Now, I can live with a 20gb loss, but when I check the disks free >>> space, they have only 166gb free with 0 gb used. Could be me, but I >>> find 34gb a bit excessive. I hope anyone has a clue as to what I'm >>> doing wrong. >>> >>> Hope someone knows what is going on. >> >> newfs(1) says: >> >>> -m free-space >>> The percentage of space reserved from normal users; the >>> minimum >>> free space threshold. The default value used is defined >>> by >>> MINFREE from , currently 8%. See >>> tunefs(8) >>> for >>> more details on how to set this option. >> >> 180 - 8% = 165.6 >> >> -- >> David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@HiWAAY.net >> ====================================================================== >> == >> Top posters will not be shown the honor of a reply. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@HiWAAY.net ======================================================================== Top posters will not be shown the honor of a reply.