Liam Proven <lproven@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 22 March 2014 17:23, lee <lee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Let`s say you install to a software RAID-1 --- which is minimum >> requirement for anything to put data on --- made from two disks, with >> encrypted partitions (as usual /, /usr, /home, /tmp, /var, /usr/local, >> and a swap partition). You want to have these partitions in a >> particular order on the disks, i. e. swap at the beginning because >> chances are it`s faster, then /usr, /var, /tmp, /usr/local and /home, in >> that order. >> >> That`s nothing complicated, either, and I don`t think that`s possible >> with Fedoras installer. Or is it? And if it is, how long does it take >> to do the partitioning? > > [Blinks] > > Wow. Now, y'see, that's something I'd consider wildly exotic and > weird. There`s nothing weird or exotic about it. I`ve always had /usr on its own partition until the F17 installer refused that, which it shouldn`t have. RAID isn`t exotic, either. Disks do fail, the only question is when, and I neither want to lose data, nor the hassle. Installing on a laptop requires encrypted partitions. They can be stolen too easily. > I never separate out /tmp or /var or /usr/local - I only ever use / > and /home basically. I always use separate partitions. It has lots of advantages. > I might split off /var on a server but I'd need a remarkably > persuasive use case, and on servers, I use extra-stable distros > without GUIs, not something like Fedora. /var can get full, and it`s written to, same goes for /tmp. How do you mount /usr read-only? Especially on a server, it`s a good idea to mount everything read-only that you can. When you have several disks, you can do your partitioning in such a way that you get better performance. Especially when you have a server, you may need a (pretty much) granted capacity on /var or /tmp to make sure it will continue to operate --- without separate partitions, your users may fill up the disks ... Nowadays you may have SSDs which supposedly last longer when not written much to but mostly read from, so you might put the partitions that can be read-only on the SSDs and use magnetic disks for things like /var, /tmp, /home and swap. Why wouldn`t you use different partitions? I can see it (and have done it) for when the available disk capacity is extremely limited, but otherwise it doesn`t make any sense and has nothing but disadvantages. > But this just illustrates the breadth of scenarios a successful > installer must cope with! It`s merely a reasonable standard thing to use separate partitions and a requirement to use RAID, and encrypted partitions for laptops, not something in any way unusual. Of course I expect an installer to handle that as well as using a single, unencrypted partition on a single disk. And it`s not too difficult. The installer doesn`t need to do the partitioning, the user does it. The installer only needs to give the user a good tool to do the partitioning the user wants and let them use it. Good tools to do partitioning are already available, and the installer doesn`t need to re-invent the wheel in that. Perhaps it even shouldn`t. Why force the user to learn how to use yet another partitioning tool they even rarely use unless they install Fedora all the time? Why not give them a choice, like either cfdisk or parted, then tell the installer what to do with each partition and let them switch between these until they are done --- or let the installer do whatever partitioning it wants, which means that all existing data on the disks will be deleted. -- Fedora release 20 (Heisenbug) -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
