[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [PATCH] - change our default partitioning scheme



> I like the idea of creating a /home by default, but I'm not a fan of the 50GB
> number.  I understand it's slightly over the current Everything install, which
> makes sense, but I think about my systems:
> 
> 1) Over time, your /home directory will probably contain more data than / what
> with music, movies, pictures, code, saved email with eBay outbid notices,
> 0-day warez, video game emulators, and other things.  My home directory is
> 27GB and / is only taking up 5.5GB.
> 
> 2) /home is also a good place for people to tar up /etc, /root, and other
> things if they want to do a fresh install of Fedora.  At least I always use it
> for that when I do a fresh Fedora install.
> 
> 3) WWSD[1] and WWFD[2] tell us that / should be minimal and most available
> space should go to either /export/home or /usr/home (maybe it's just /home now
> on FreeBSD).

Well, there were a couple of reasons why I wanted to go with these
numbers:

(1) Accomodate the crazy Everything install people now.

(2) Provide enough room to store packages when doing yum upgrade or
preupgrade.

(3) Make it big enough so we don't have to worry about bumping the size
up every release as the distribution gets bigger.

(4) We're not recommending a separate /opt, /usr/local, /var, or /tmp
right now so we need enough space for all the things people could do
with those filesystems.

> I'm also thinking of what people would be expecting during an install.  If I
> have a 250GB disk and 50GB is allocated to / by default, I'm going to change
> that.  I still want a 10GB / and the rest for /home.  What are other people's
> thoughts on this?
> 
> I'm in favor of a /home by default, but I'd like to see the / value lowered
> from 50GB.

The way I see it, things are moving in two different directions right
now:  disks are getting smaller (netbooks, etc.) and disks are getting
larger (everyone else).  For the smaller case, we don't need to worry
about this because we're throwing out the /home case there.  For larger,
disks are really giant these days.  If we're suggesting 50 GB for / and
that leaves 500 GB for /home, I don't think most people are going to
care about what space they might be losing there.

I really don't think it's g oing to be an issue, but keep in mind that
these are just recommendations and the user always has the option to
change things in the partitioning UI.  We don't need to be perfect -
just good enough.

Having said that, I'm not completely tied to this 50 GB number.  I did
just kind of pull it out of thin air.

> 1) For live installs, we know the size of what's going to /, so we could use
> that as the basis for sizing /, then make /boot, swap, and /home.

True, we could be smarter here.  That would have to involve setting this
default partition in the backend and might be a little difficult.
However, it could be a decent refinement.

> 2) x86 may have a smaller / requirement than x86_64, should that be
> considered?

Eh, I don't know that it's too important.  But it would be easy enough
to take into account with the Platform module.

> 3) Let's say "f the FHS" and change /home to /users.

Only if we can call it /Users.

- Chris


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]