Subject: Re: disk partition size
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG, port-i386@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Robert.V.Baron <>
List: port-i386
Date: 12/06/1997 10:40:00
> On Sat, Dec 06, 1997 at 07:26:13PM +1100, Simon Burge wrote:
> You _do_ have a choice.  The "standard" distribution partition layout
> is a root, swap and usr.  With a "custom" layout, you get prompted for
> the size of root and swap (and on the pmax and arm /usr), and get to add
> anything left over to other partitions.  You can then change the sizes
> and mount points if you want.
> One example would be choose a "custom" partition layout, put 200MB in
> root, 64 in swap and the rest in /usr1.  On a pmax for example, you'd
> make the rest /usr, and then change the mount point to /usr1.

It seems that there are differences as to how to lay out the disk ;-).

I have even been swayed a little.  the root&usr partitions dates back
to the days where the system would be rebooted if there were errors
on fscking root so you really did not want a large root.  So merging
them today seems a good idea.  

I even like the layout describe in the "example" above.  What issue, I
think, remains is what should the default for the "naive" user be.  I'd
prefer something like this "example" than the current defaults.

One reason I like to separate the system (/root /usr) from my code
(/usr1 [this would include pkg, x, emacs) is so I can do an "upgrade
by wiping /root&/usr.  What I don't like about the current upgrade
scheme is that it just overwrites what is there (on root & usr).
So that there is a lot of dead stuff.  For example /etc/magic went
away between 1.2 and 1.3 and mtree changed and of course the shared
libraries got updated.  So unless you scupulously find all these
ghosts.  People upgrading and people installing will have a slightly
different system.  This is very bad.  What do other people do?

By the way, what about pkg's.  How are they going to be in the release?