| 1 |
Am 30.09.2013 11:00, schrieb Alan McKinnon: |
| 2 |
> On 30/09/2013 00:53, Tanstaafl wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 2013-09-29 5:15 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Those numbers are not likely to change much with time, with one |
| 5 |
>>> exception: |
| 6 |
>>> |
| 7 |
>>> /usr/src |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>>> That can get real big real quick if you don't clean up kernel sources |
| 10 |
>>> often. Ideally, you'd make that a suitably sized LV and mount it |
| 11 |
>>> seperately. |
| 12 |
>> Yeah, I always keep 2 or 3 known good kernels, and clean out the old |
| 13 |
>> stuff, so no worries there. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>>> The other space consumer is /usr/share with it's many documentation |
| 16 |
>>> files. But those too tend to be stable once you have everything |
| 17 |
>>> installed. 5G free out of 19G is ~75% space in use which is perfectly |
| 18 |
>>> acceptable for this case. |
| 19 |
>>> |
| 20 |
>>> Regular monitoring of the state of your machines will tell you if space |
| 21 |
>>> usage increases so you can investigate and deal with it timeously. |
| 22 |
>>> |
| 23 |
>>> I assume you long since moved portage and it's storage directories out |
| 24 |
>>> of /usr into /var? |
| 25 |
>> Hmmm... No, I never did that myself... |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
>> Wow... |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
>> moria : Sun Sep 29, 18:19:01 : ~ |
| 30 |
>> # du -sh /usr/* |
| 31 |
>> 85M /usr/bin |
| 32 |
>> 131M /usr/include |
| 33 |
>> 0 /usr/lib |
| 34 |
>> 11M /usr/lib32 |
| 35 |
>> 530M /usr/lib64 |
| 36 |
>> 51M /usr/libexec |
| 37 |
>> 15M /usr/local |
| 38 |
>> 7.8G /usr/portage |
| 39 |
>> 21M /usr/sbin |
| 40 |
>> 509M /usr/share |
| 41 |
>> 3.9G /usr/src |
| 42 |
>> 0 /usr/tmp |
| 43 |
>> 7.0M /usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu |
| 44 |
>> moria : Sun Sep 29, 18:26:30 : ~ |
| 45 |
>> # |
| 46 |
> Apart from portage and src that all looks totally normal and unlikely to |
| 47 |
> vary much over time. |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
>> Is this the official gentoo way now? Will a new/fresh virgin install |
| 52 |
>> have /var/portage instead of /usr/portage? |
| 53 |
> The new instaled default is to put all of portage on /var, whilst still |
| 54 |
> supporting old installs on /usr. This is no big deal in code, as it's |
| 55 |
> really just a string containing a base path |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
>> I can eliminate almost 8GB by moving portage and its storage directories... |
| 59 |
> Or move them onto a dedictaed LV. This is a case where a different mount |
| 60 |
> point makes a lot of sense - we're all aware just how unique the tree is |
| 61 |
> in terms of fs performance - thousands of small files mostly smaller |
| 62 |
> than 2k in hundreds of directories. It's quite different to everything |
| 63 |
> else on /usr or even /var. |
| 64 |
> |
| 65 |
> Same with distfiles, that too can move anywhere you want it to be, just |
| 66 |
> adjust one setting in make.conf |
| 67 |
> |
| 68 |
>> I don't recall seeing a news item about that... |
| 69 |
> IIRC it wasn't a news item as such. Perhaps it was an elog from portage |
| 70 |
> itself. |
| 71 |
> |
| 72 |
> |
| 73 |
>> But... is /usr/portage the default/recommended location? If so, then I |
| 74 |
>> don't think I want to move it - I generally never change defaults unless |
| 75 |
>> there is a very good reason to do so. |
| 76 |
> It's /var/portage for new installs. If you want it to be somewhere else, |
| 77 |
> just move it and adjust make.conf |
| 78 |
> |
| 79 |
> |
| 80 |
really? so when I moved PORTDIR to /var/portage I was ahead of the rest? |
| 81 |
Wow... |
Archives