Valent Turkovic wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 5:31 PM, Les Mikesell
<lesmikesell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> > Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
> >> Perhaps we could create a new option, like "Recommended layout for
> >> desktops," that uses a reasonable estimate of what the partition
> >> layout should be. If a user wants to change that, they can (and they
> >> can always "review and modify" the partition layout), and they
can
> >> always resize later if they need to. New users are often unsure of
> >> what the partition layout is, and unfortunately, they often fail to
> >> read the install guide.
> >
> > People can always resize / later and add a /home. Every system needs a
> > / but not every system needs a /home. Is there a strong technical
> > reason for a default /home? Would that same reason also apply toward a
> > separate /usr and /var and /var/tmp? Please, lets not get nostalgic for
> > SunOS 4 partitioning!
>
> Most partitioning decisions are about controlling the sizes separately
> or when you want to put different operations like the logging or
> database files in /var and user files in /home on different physical
> drives to eliminate head contention. You might want to separate both of
> those from the OS files and swap, but using different partitions on the
> same drive (and probably LVM) just makes the seeks take longer.
>
> --
> Les Mikesell
> lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
>
I saw few times that some users put too much stuff in their home
folder and fill their HDD until there was 0 free space, and their
machines didn't boot after that - separate /home fixes that.
I'm talking about Live CD and desktop users.
Valent.
For the purpose of the initscripts, simply increasing the reserved
blocks percentage will fix this, but I promise you that will piss off a
lot of people. This doesn't help your target user anyway, since
Gnome/KDE will be very unhappy when /home is full.
-- Chris