[9fans] ~Off Topic: disk layout

[9fans] ~Off Topic: disk layout

[Gabriel Diaz]

hello

it was usual in the unix time (that is, when there was no plan9) to
have those bloated disk layouts that lunix suggests? or just was
common to have a couple of disks instead of one?

i wonder where that came from. . .

thanks,

gabi



On 1/28/07, sqweek <sqweek@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/28/07, erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com> wrote:
> >         if(test -f /dev/mousectl && ~ $mouseport ps2 ps2intellimouse 0 1 2 usb){
> >                 if(~ $mouseport usb)
> >                         usbstart
> >                 if not
> >                         aux/mouse $mouseport
>
>  Inspired by this code, I tried entering some gibberish at the
> mouseport prompt instead of just hitting enter, and suddenly the
> keyboard worked for the install.
>  So, two hours and one recovery from having my partition table crapped
> on (thank you testdisk) later, I have plan9 installed. Tomorrow I'll
> see if I can convince lilo to boot it and check out the usb stuff.
>
>  But OK, the partition thing deserves some attention. I'm actually
> somewhat impressed and somewhat horrified at the same time... Here was
> my setup prior to the plan9 install (9039 cylinders total):
> PRI1  0001-8633 Extended
> PRI2  8634-8756 Linux swap
> LOG5 0001-0032 Linux /boot
> LOG6 0033-2465 Linux /home
> LOG7 2466-4333 Linux /usr
> LOG8 4334-4956 Linux /var
> LOG9 4957-5081 Linux /
> LOG10 5082-5144 Linux /tmp
>
>  So I went to give plan9 about 5G of logical partition at 5145-5775
> (IIRC I entered p8 as the partition name in plan9's fdisk, which may
> have marked the start of my problems). This is what I ended up with:
> PRI1  0001-5144 Extended
> PRI2  5145-5775 Plan9
> PRI3  8634-8756 Linux swap
> LOG5 0001-0032 Linux /boot
> LOG6 0033-2465 Linux /home
>
>  And that's it, logical partitions 7-10 where nowhere to be found
> (linux wasn't to happy when it couldn't find its root device). So
> plan9 shoved the swap partition out of the way and made a new primary
> for itself (this is the impressive part). Fortunately, after restoring
> the missing partitions and booting back into linux it hasn't mounted
> /dev/sda2 as swap and pissed all over the plan9 install. I think that
> makes the score Linux: 1 Plan9: 0 sqweek: -1.
>
>  I'm not sure whether it's the partitioning step that did me in or the
> boot setup. Since I don't have windows and couldn't be assed looking
> for a floppy, I hit plan9 at that step, which may have been what
> motivated it to put itself on a primary partition.
>

Re: [9fans] ~Off Topic: disk layout

[sqweek]

 I'm not really sure about original motivations, to be honest.
Personally, I have a seperate partition for /boot to make sure the
kernel stays beneath cylinder 1024 (when I started using linux this
was a common BIOS/bootloader limitation, so /boot became something of
a habit).
 Having /home on a seperate partition is comforting, at the very least
- in a worst case scenario where I totally fuck up my system I can
just wipe the /boot /usr /var / /tmp partitions and not worry about
losing anything important.
 /usr /var and /tmp are kind of an extension of the partitioning
scheme, and in retrospect pretty much useless. It just forces me to
use a bit of discipline about how much crap I keep around (I've run
out of space on /var a couple of times).

PS. If you're going to top post while quoting a bottom posted reply
can you at least snip the irrelevant junk?

On 1/29/07, Gabriel Diaz <gabidiaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> it was usual in the unix time (that is, when there was no plan9) to
> have those bloated disk layouts that lunix suggests? or just was
> common to have a couple of disks instead of one?
>
> On 1/28/07, sqweek <sqweek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > PRI1  0001-8633 Extended
> > PRI2  8634-8756 Linux swap
> > LOG5 0001-0032 Linux /boot
> > LOG6 0033-2465 Linux /home
> > LOG7 2466-4333 Linux /usr
> > LOG8 4334-4956 Linux /var
> > LOG9 4957-5081 Linux /
> > LOG10 5082-5144 Linux /tmp

Re: [9fans] ~Off Topic: disk layout

[Gabriel Diaz]

hello

>  I'm not really sure about original motivations, to be honest.

that's just what i want to know about, if was common on unix days.

> PS. If you're going to top post while quoting a bottom posted reply
> can you at least snip the irrelevant junk?

i've just replied, i will take more care if this is so annoying.  I
should put that on a new non-related mail, that way would be easier to
see that i didn't mean that your particular disk is bad o not. My
apologies to make you justify something doesn't need a justification.

slds.

gabi