Moving from 10.04 to 12.04

Jim Byrnes jf_byrnes at
Sun Sep 9 21:23:38 UTC 2012

On 09/09/2012 11:01 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 9 September 2012 16:49, Jim Byrnes <jf_byrnes at> wrote:
>> I know from reading your posts in the past you know way more than I do, but
>> I don't agree here.  Maybe I didn't make my intent clear.  The two drives
>> will /never/ be hooked up at the same time.  The old HD will only be a
>> fallback if for some reason I can't get everything working on the new
>> install.
> OK, that's fine. It's your PC! Do what you like! :¬) But one question
> - how are you going to transfer all your files & data across from old
> to new disk?

As I mention when I started this thread I would transfer them to my 
laptop and then back to the new HD.  Thinking about my response I 
realized that I have an external USB HD that I use for regular back ups 
so they would be available there also.

>> So are you saying here that my calculation method is correct, but I could
>> reclaim a lot of space by doing what you outline above. In that case I
>> should do the clean up and then redo the calculation.
> If you like, yes. I am not sure there is much to be availed from it,
> but if you want to, knock yourself out. :¬)
> I don't know this, but I suspect something like it might be the case:
> if you have a big root FS, then Ubuntu won't bother to be very
> diligent about cleaning up package caches and so on. It might only
> take the time to clear down caches, possibly to purge old logfiles and
> so on once free space on the volume drops to a certain percentage or
> something. So if you have a relatively huge filesystem, it will let
> stuff mount up; if you have a smaller one, it will purge caches & logs
> more often to ensure that the drive never gets below 25% full or
> something.
> This is pure supposition, I emphasise.
> But in terms of space for root - a full install of Ubuntu is only a
> few gig. Add in all the proprietary extras and so on and it's still
> not much bigger than that. You can fit a working, complete,
> un-pared-down install into 4GB. 8GB will be less than 50% used when
> new. 16GB will be under 25% used when new, full updated & with a few
> extra apps added - I routinely add things like Pidgin, Synaptic,
> Google Chrome, a few indicators, commonly VirtualBox and so on.
> 16GB is quite generous and will normally go 75% unused. 32GB is
> extremely generous and will typically go about 85-90% unused. More
> than that is just throwing disk space away, but hey, if you have it,
> there is nothing to stop you throwing it away.
> My server machines (no GUI etc.) typically run off 8GB drives or
> partitions and have tons of room to spare.

All the numbers you state above just make me more than ever want to know 
if the assumptions I made in calculating what the size of my / partition 
would be if I had a separate /home partition on my present HD. I 
calculated it to be 41GB which seemed high compared to what I saw on the 
web and certainly is when looking at your numbers.  So far no one has 
said "Hey Jim your numbers are way off because..."

Regards,  Jim

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list