| 1 |
On Thursday 20 December 2007 15:39:59 Alexander Skwar wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinrichs@××××××.de> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Here is what I would recommend for a normal linux system: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > [hs]da1: /boot, 64M, ext2 |
| 6 |
> > [hs]da2: /, 256M, ext3 or xfs |
| 7 |
> > [hs]da3: LVM |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I used to use something like this for a long time as well, |
| 10 |
> but I think it was Neil from this list, who made me think |
| 11 |
> about that - what's the use of /boot here? Why a seperate |
| 12 |
> /boot partition? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
OK, in reality I have / on LVM also (needs an initramfs, of course), so I need to have them separated. The other reason is fs choice. If you don't need this, you can also merge / and /boot. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> I don't have swap on LVM, as I'd like to do suspend-to-disk, |
| 17 |
> which is easier to do with an old-style partition. And I |
| 18 |
> also don't resize my swap partition. But if I'd need *additional* |
| 19 |
> swap, I'd create that as a LV on LVM - it's just the "primary" |
| 20 |
> SWAP, which I like to keep off-LVM. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Good point. I also don't do suspend-to-disk, so I make it a LV or even leave it out completely on systems with >=1G RAM, but there may be cases where swap is needed even with this large amount of memory. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Bye... |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Dirk |
Archives