minimum "/" partition size

[ruscook]

Wenzhuo Zhang wrote:
> Felix Miata wrote:
>   
>> On 2007/06/24 16:19 (GMT+0800) Wenzhuo Zhang apparently typed:
>>
>>     
>>> If you have a modern BIOS, I would not recommend a separate /boot partition.
>>>       
>> Why?
>>     
>
> Because it is unnecessary for PCs with LBA support. If it's unnecessary,
> why bother a separate partition? But still you need keep the boot files
> within the 137.4GiB range, I guess.
>   
This is not strictly true. A lot of distro's won't boot with /boot on an 
XFS or reiserfs file system (not sure about other journalled file 
systems).  Obviously boot is rarely written to so doesn't need a journal 
file system for itself, but if you keep /var or /tmp on / then / 
definitely benefits from a journal file system (I use XFS), therefore I 
need a small (about 120MB) ext2 /boot partition.

-- 

Kind Regards Russell
==================
www.windsorcycles.com.au
sales at windsorcycles.com.au
ph. 02 4577 3209
bikes.no-ip.info
Linux user #369094
==================

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20070625/e4da257b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bike_oz.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 127 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20070625/e4da257b/attachment.vcf>