Debian cd supporting ext4.
in [Debian]
|
From: Tom H on 28 Jul 2010 12:00 On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Sthu Deus <sthu.deus(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Thank You for Your time and answer, Wolodja: > >> Using ext4 for /boot is discouraged but you can give it a try. Why do >> you need /boot to be ext4? > > Because I have single partition. :) > > Well. For now I have tried w/ two - /boot as ext3 and / as ext4 - > nothing happened - I got the into the same situation as I had before, > by simple converting of ext3 to ext4 - I got a statement at boot time > that / can not be mounted - no such device, while a message before > states, there is such an one. > > PS I used the "kmuto's work". If /boot is an ext4 filesystem, grub1/grub-legacy will not be able to access it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTik3O3Ege8=OrKS2BwXrVM5moUseeWU36kO1Yrom(a)mail.gmail.com
From: Robert Holtzman on 28 Jul 2010 17:50 On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 09:43:59PM +0700, Sthu Deus wrote: > Thank You for Your time and answer, Wolodja: > > > Using ext4 for /boot is discouraged but you can give it a try. Why do > > you need /boot to be ext4? > > Because I have single partition. :) What was the reason for that? The usual plan is to put /home, at least, on a separate partition. -- Bob Holtzman Key ID: 8D549279 "If you think you're getting free lunch, check the price of the beer"
From: Jordon Bedwell on 28 Jul 2010 19:10 On 7/28/10 4:40 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 09:43:59PM +0700, Sthu Deus wrote: >> Thank You for Your time and answer, Wolodja: >> >>> Using ext4 for /boot is discouraged but you can give it a try. Why do >>> you need /boot to be ext4? >> >> Because I have single partition. :) > > What was the reason for that? The usual plan is to put /home, at least, > on a separate partition. > The *usual* plan is to put it on a separate drive (but since debian can't judge how smart a user is ~ they put it on the same drive different partition) or if you use network storage, to keep it on the same drive in the same partition. Not everybody runs critical systems or even stores anything in /home. I know on my Debian installs nothing is in /home/username. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4C50B749.60104(a)envygeeks.com
From: Robert Holtzman on 29 Jul 2010 03:00 On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 06:03:37PM -0500, Jordon Bedwell wrote: > On 7/28/10 4:40 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote: > > > >What was the reason for that? The usual plan is to put /home, at least, > >on a separate partition. > > > > The *usual* plan is to put it on a separate drive (but since debian > can't judge how smart a user is ~ they put it on the same drive > different partition) or if you use network storage, to keep it on > the same drive in the same partition. Not everybody runs critical > systems or even stores anything in /home. I know on my Debian > installs nothing is in /home/username. Dandy *if* you have two drives. How many home users would that be? -- Bob Holtzman Key ID: 8D549279 "If you think you're getting free lunch, check the price of the beer"
From: Sjoerd Hardeman on 29 Jul 2010 04:20
Robert Holtzman schreef: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 06:03:37PM -0500, Jordon Bedwell wrote: >> On 7/28/10 4:40 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote: >>> What was the reason for that? The usual plan is to put /home, at least, >>> on a separate partition. >>> >> The *usual* plan is to put it on a separate drive (but since debian >> can't judge how smart a user is ~ they put it on the same drive >> different partition) or if you use network storage, to keep it on >> the same drive in the same partition. Not everybody runs critical >> systems or even stores anything in /home. I know on my Debian >> installs nothing is in /home/username. > > Dandy *if* you have two drives. How many home users would that be? Also, multiple partitions lose their usefulness for a single-user linux machine. I do not run a mail server which justifies a separate /var, ans since I can fill /usr or /etc just as well as /home, there's no real reason to create multiple partitions. The only exception of course is a separate /boot to avoid boot problems. Sjoerd |