HI All, When I was dealing with Mandrake, they suggested using different partitions for /, /usr, and /home. SuSE puts it all on one big partition. Is there some reason for that? I was just wondering because I may be forced to reinstall this thing again which would mean all my settings are toast. If multiple partitions are the way to go, is it possible to get /usr and /home together on one partition? Thanks Russ
Russ wrote:
When I was dealing with Mandrake, they suggested using different partitions for /, /usr, and /home. SuSE puts it all on one big partition.
They both default that way. There's nothing to prevent you from choosing your own configuration.
Is there some reason for that? I was just wondering because I may be forced to reinstall this thing again which would mean all my settings are toast.
I set /boot, /home and / on separate partitions. Keeping /home separate makes it easy enough to reinstall without losing important stuff on reinstall. Things you want from your /etc and elsewhere can easily be saved to your /home or a backup partition before you do your reinstall. -- "The object and practice of liberty lies in the limitation of governmental power." General Douglas MacArthur Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/partitioningindex.html
Russ wrote:
HI All,
When I was dealing with Mandrake, they suggested using different partitions for /, /usr, and /home. SuSE puts it all on one big partition. Is there some reason for that? I was just wondering because I may be forced to reinstall this thing again which would mean all my settings are toast.
If multiple partitions are the way to go, is it possible to get /usr and /home together on one partition?
Certainly. I've got multiple partitions on my notebook running SuSE 9.
Le Mercredi 14 Janvier 2004 06:16, Russ a écrit :
HI All,
When I was dealing with Mandrake, they suggested using different partitions for /, /usr, and /home. SuSE puts it all on one big partition. Is there some reason for that? I was just wondering because I may be forced to reinstall this thing again which would mean all my settings are toast.
If multiple partitions are the way to go, is it possible to get /usr and /home together on one partition?
Maybe you can imitate freeBSD tree structure in which /home is a link to /usr/home During installation, create a /usr partition and what you wand, but no /home partition. When instalation completed, move /home in /usr and create link from /usr/home to /home. I don't attempt this manipulation on runing system, and my /home partition is too big to enter my /usr !! Franz
F.G.Knuts wrote:
Le Mercredi 14 Janvier 2004 06:16, Russ a écrit :
HI All,
When I was dealing with Mandrake, they suggested using different partitions for /, /usr, and /home. SuSE puts it all on one big partition. Is there some reason for that? I was just wondering because I may be forced to reinstall this thing again which would mean all my settings are toast.
If multiple partitions are the way to go, is it possible to get /usr and /home together on one partition?
Maybe you can imitate freeBSD tree structure in which /home is a link to /usr/home During installation, create a /usr partition and what you wand, but no /home partition. When instalation completed, move /home in /usr and create link from /usr/home to /home. I don't attempt this manipulation on runing system, and my /home partition is too big to enter my /usr !!
Franz
With large disks, even Sun have largely phased out chopping them up into smaller disks and symlink hell - space ending up somewhere else. At least AIX with smit got it partly right as you can grow a partition dynamically. I've found that a rogue IDE controller has no respect for partitions and when a HD goes bad, it's bad, so I have on a 160 Gig HD, a / and a swap partition. When I ask guys why the multiple Linux partitions, I've yet to get a coherent answer. Still either way won't have you foul of the DMCA - at least not yet. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer Linux Only Shop.
On Thursday 15 January 2004 02:15, Sid Boyce wrote:
With large disks, even Sun have largely phased out chopping them up into smaller disks and symlink hell - space ending up somewhere else. At least AIX with smit got it partly right as you can grow a partition dynamically. I've found that a rogue IDE controller has no respect for partitions and when a HD goes bad, it's bad, so I have on a 160 Gig HD, a / and a swap partition. When I ask guys why the multiple Linux partitions, I've yet to get a coherent answer. Still either way won't have you foul of the DMCA - at least not yet.
Some of the top of my head. 1. If you run out of space and the system can't write to places like /var and /tmp you'll get unusual failures and results. 2. When it comes time to upgrade, you can save yourself a bit of time if /home is on a seperate partition, as it won't need to be restored. 3. My main tower is setup with LVM, but my / and /boot needed to be on standard partitions, but I still want the striping performance on /usr /opt / home etc. (I believe I can create my own initrd to include the LVM drivers, so that / can be on LVM, but I'm using GRUB which I'm fairly sure can't cope with and LVM'd /boot. I don't know if LILO can do this. Basically I'm lazy, and it's quicker and simpler to just split my partitions out.) 4. I can pick different strategies for different areas (i.e. striped partitions for performance (binaries), or mirrored partitions for security (user data), obviously these need to be on seperate disks. It sounds like you have a typical Windows style boxen, with a single large hard drive, probably with standard partition types, and I'm guessing you are the sole user. In this case, yes it makes sense to keep things simple. However I have four HD's spread over 3 different controllers, I can get better performance and functionality because I have things split out. My main system partitions use LVM's split between two disks for speed and flexibilty (dynamic resize of partitions), and the two other disks each have a swap partition on for speeding up VM. -- stephen/dot/boddy/at/btinternet/dot/com
F.G.Knuts wrote:
Le Mercredi 14 Janvier 2004 06:16, Russ a écrit :
HI All,
When I was dealing with Mandrake, they suggested using different partitions for /, /usr, and /home. SuSE puts it all on one big partition. Is there some reason for that? I was just wondering because I may be forced to reinstall this thing again which would mean all my settings are toast.
If multiple partitions are the way to go, is it possible to get /usr and /home together on one partition? Slightly different but when I installed SuSE 9.0 I was able to do custom
Sid Boyce wrote: partitioning. This enabled me to create mount points on each partition. From what I can see in the fstab file /usr, /home and /var etc are all on different partitions. I have to reinstall several times to get the setup I wanted and each time I did an install I chose the custom partitioning which allowed me to format/leave a certain partition alone. With the above custom partitioning you could leave the individual /usr /home and /etc(A lot of settings are stored here) partitions well alone and reinstall the root / directory and still have all your settings on the new system. ... [snip] ... -- The Little Helper ======================================================================== Hylton Conacher - Licenced ex-Windows user (apart from Quicken) Registered Linux user # 229959 at http://counter.li.org Using SuSE 9.0 with KDE 3.1 ========================================================================
participants (7)
-
F.G.Knuts -
Felix Miata -
Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) -
James Knott -
Russ -
Sid Boyce -
Stephen Boddy