On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:50:34 -0500, Graham Campbell <gc1111@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 2004-11-21 at 11:50 +0800, John Summerfield wrote: > > > > On Saturday 20 November 2004 17:41, Chris Jones wrote: > > > My question is what are the best partition sizes I should adopt, > > > particalarly as I am about to upgrade to FC3 - / and /usr are both too > > > small currently. Should I create symlinks into /home for some of the > > > directory's in the / and /usr areas? If so, which ones can safely be > > > symlinked? Or should I re-partition (after backing up everything I need)? > > > > If it works, one big partition, swap to a file. > > > > I've tried multipartitions, it alays causes hassles like this and it's never > > saved me from anthing. > > > > If your hardware is pickly about where it loads the kernel from, then /boot of > > 100 Mb ((or whatever fc docs say). > > > > Swap to a file, not to a partition. > > I agree about the partitioning. The habit of splitting things into > various partitions came from large multi-user systems where it has > definite advantages. But for workstations, or other essentially single > user systems it is definitely sub-optimal. no. this is just a problem of user education. If everyone adopts lvm and learns to dynamically manage partitions then this problem would just go away. fc3 default lvm is a step in the right direction. for every user including desktop and workstation ones seperate partitions are highly recommended. a home user with seperate /home can move between distros and versions without losing data for example -- Regards, Rahul Sundaram
