From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: lost.goblin@gmail.com Received: by 10.236.95.4 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:32:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5016B4B8.3040608@gmail.com> References: <5016B4B8.3040608@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 20:32:22 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: uGTM1-f1m3xb8_AvQecmMWom_k0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Installing 9front From: Uriel To: 9front@googlegroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Matthew Veety wrote: > On 7/30/12 7:09 AM, Uriel wrote: >> >> 3) Not only are the disk space requirements are somewhat high, but you >> get no warning if your disk is too small, you go all the way into >> copydist, which barfs on disk full errors, but 'completes' anyway and >> pretends it is done and that you can go on with the next install step. >> >> At the very least we should warn if the disk is too small, and >> probably we should fail before going into copydist. > > > I agree with you here, an option to use kfs would be awesome, especially > because cwfs is overkill for non-fileserver cases. > > Also, I think work should be done to make cwfs a little more versatile when > it comes to disk size. I'm not convinced that adding extra complexity to save some Gb is worth it, it creates a very different kind of system to test. I'd rather handle properly the situations where there is no enough space, and trim the system where it is reasonable (maybe look into a way to 'clip' the hg history?) Uriel