cvs commit: src/sys/conf kern.post.mk

[Garance A Drosehn]

At 8:29 AM -0700 9/13/05, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>On Sep 13, 2005, at 5:58 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>>AFAIK, we still do not turn softupdates on /, but do on other
>>partitions.  With your proposed idea, softupdates should be
>>on on /.   How safe is this today?
>
>I never use separate partitions for /usr and /var on my scratch
>boxes and I always enable SU on /. I can't say I've ever had any
>problems.

Just as another data point:  I do *not* have a separate partition
for /usr and /var (*), so my '/' partitions are similar in size to
the standard setup.  On two machines that I can quickly check here,
I have a 300-meg '/' on one, and a 470-meg '/' on the other.  My
other systems probably have a smaller root partition, because these
two machines are my two most-recent builds.

I have been running with softupdates enabled on '/' for a long time,
and as far as I know it hasn't caused me any problems since maybe
5.2.1.  It did used to cause me occasional problems a few years ago,
but I can't remember any recent problems.

I must admit I'm a little uneasy moving /usr and /var into '/', just
because I'm so used to the way it is.  I really *like* having /var as
a separate partition.  But hard disks are huge compared to how they
used to be, so I don't mind having a 500-meg '/'.  I *do* save the
kernel.debug information in my /boot/kernel's, and my root partition
is still under 50% full.

(* - Except for my PowerPC machine...  That machine has everything
      in '/' except for one large empty partition on '/usr/obj', and
      a memory-disk partition sitting on /tmp_md ).

-- 
Garance Alistair Drosehn     =      gad at gilead.netel.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer               or   gad at FreeBSD.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute;             Troy, NY;  USA