What I do for a new machine?

Olivier Pavilla olivier.pavilla at linux-squad.com
Fri Dec 2 15:13:53 UTC 2011

Le 02/12/2011 16:04, Liam Proven a écrit :
> On 2 December 2011 14:35, LinuxIsOne <linuxisone at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> You don't need /boot any more. It was useful about a decade or more
>>> ago when many BIOSes had limitations such as being unable to boot from
>>> cylinders on the hard disk numbered above 1024, or were unable to boot
>>> from sections above a certain size limit - at various times, there
>>> were limitations above 32MB, 512MB, 8GB, 32GB and 120GB.
>>> Now, don't worry about it.
>>> You need / and swap. Having /home as well is useful.
>>> For / - depending on the size of your disk - 16GB is generous and 32GB
>>> is massive. For swap, use 2× the amount of physical RAM, as a
>>> guideline. That is very generous. All the rest of the space you can
>>> give to /home.
>>> The simplest system is:
>>> Primary partition (e.g. /dev/sda1) = /
>>> Extended partition = all the rest of the space
>>> 1st logical partition (e.g. /dev/sda5) = /home
>>> 2nd (e.g. /dev/sda6) = swap
>>> Some people claim there is a performance drop due to swap at the end
>>> of the disk. This is not true. I have tested it, directly,
>>> extensively, with thorough benchmarks. There was no measurable
>>> difference to the 2nd decimal place in the mid-1990s and disks were a
>>> LOT slower then. Now, it does not matter at all.
>> That is good, but just as a point of information please let me know if
>> I separate also like Olivier said -
>> ext4 / = 20 GB
>> ext4 /boot = 5 GB
>> ext4 /home = 180 GB (encrypted)
>> ext4 /opt = 10 GB
>> ext4 /tmp = 10 GB
>> ext4 /usr/local = 10 GB
>> ext4 /var = 10 GB
>> swap = 5 GB (encrypted)
> I see no benefit, and a lot of extra complexity, and arguably a waste
> of disk space.
> If you want to dual-boot at some time - perhaps to try out the next
> version of Ubuntu without wiping this one - then it will be /much/
> harder with such a setup. It is harder to create, harder to maintain,
> will be harder to copy to another drive if you upgrade, and there is
> no real benefit.

I'm not agree with you. And I think you think anyone must think the same
as yours.
Maybe it's too much complex for you but it's not.
this was an example of partitions. I didn't advice anyone to copy
/ is on /dev/sda2
/boot is on /dev/sda1
/home is on /dev/sda4 <= encrypted
/opt is on /dev/sda6
/tmp is on /dev/sda5
/usr/local is on /dev/sda8
/var is on /dev/sda7
swap is on /dev/sda9 <= encrypted

So this using is for laptop. In my world there is some thief. And
sometimes there are little bit curious about what they stole. With /home
and swap encrypted. My private data are lost for me and the thief.

In my case. I really don't care with windows. So. There is only one OS.
Linux ubuntu. Dual boot is not for this schema of partition.

You think you're modern. You're just little bit arrogant...

Olivier Pavilla
"Les fautes d'orthographes de mes propos sont sous licence Ane bâté 1.0"

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 554 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20111202/e49327ca/attachment.pgp>

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list