Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:45:24 +0200 From: Alex de Kruijff <freebsd@akruijff.dds.nl> To: Jerry McAllister <jerrymc@clunix.cl.msu.edu> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Partition sizes for small harddisk Message-ID: <20040620204524.GA907@alex.lan> In-Reply-To: <200406201942.i5KJg8Z04353@clunix.cl.msu.edu> References: <200406202130310201.456FADCF@smtp.xs4all.nl> <200406201942.i5KJg8Z04353@clunix.cl.msu.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 03:41:53PM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > I'm trying to install FreeBSD 4.10 on an older computer with a 852 MB hard > > disk. > > According to the handbook, 250 MB should suffice for text mode only. > > However, both the "User" and (retried) "Minimal" distributions left me > > with no space in /usr > > I used the default partitioning (entire disk) and said "No" to the ports > > and linux compatibility prompts. > > > > Assuming that the defaults are optimized for larger disks, how would I > > best divide the available space? > > With that little disk space, I would be inclined to make it all > just one root (/) partition - with a bit of swap. You might not > even be able to have a swap as big as memory with no more disk than > that, but try for a swap of memory size or at least 100 MB or so > and the rest in /. > > I think FreeBSD has grown since they made those claims of 250 MB > being enough for a minimum. You might be able to cram it in, > but would have little room for doing anything. That is realy a bad idee. / is supposted to be small to limit the change that something irriversible happens to it during a crash /tmp can be mounted so that it gets a real power boost There are many other reason why not to do this. I can't think of them this quickly. -- Alex Articles based on solutions that I use: http://www.kruijff.org/alex/FreeBSD/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040620204524.GA907>