4 ms·
I think you might be right. The partitioning is very old school but if you need old school partition it's right there. If you don't need old school partition l
by detourdog 3y ago
I think you might be right. The partitioning is very old school but if you need old school partition it's right there.
If you don't need old school partition learn what you do need and move on.
The documentation has always matched the experience with OpenBSD. I enjoy OpenBSD simply becuase I know where to find the documentation. Some OS's have so many variations that I'm overwhelmed.
Considering the goals of OpenBSD the partitioning is a feature and structural.
- jmclnx 3y agoOne thing for people coming from Linux. If you decide to put everything in one large partition (not really recommended), always make sure /usr/local is on its own partition. If you do not do that, some ports will core dump. If you use one big partition, you will need to disable an important security feature to allow the ports to run.
- doublerabbit 3y ago> If you do not do that, some ports will core dump. What ports are you talking about? I'm using FreeBSD as my daily driver, never had a port core-dump due to this.
- j_not_j 3y agowxallowed flag is required for some ports that write to pages that are also executable. OpenBSD prohibits this except when code is run from a partition that permits it by means of a mount flag. Otherwise you get a core dump. And all the partitions are largely an availability feature: if errant code fills up /var/log then /home is still usable.
- doublerabbit 3y agoOh right. I've just never encountered such issues in the years I've been using FreeBSD, with /usr/local being one big partition. I'm aware of that if no partitions are filled it causes an domino effect if not on its own partition. I have ZFS quotas configured so surely that mitigates the issue? Handy to know though.
- lproven 3y agoYou are replying to a comment about OPEN BSD, not FreeBSD.
- doublerabbit 3y agoYeah I know. Tyvm
- lproven 3y agoThen I don't see your point here at all. "On platform X, you must do A." "Huh, weird, that's never affected me using (thing that only runs on platform B)."
- housemusicfan 3y agoAnd yet the last time I accepted OpenBSD's partitioning defaults I ended up with "/usr: no space left on device" the first time I tried building something from ports.
- detourdog 3y agoThe defaults probably are probably close to the minimums required. Remember this is a conservative operating system. They will not look at your system and guess how you want to use it and make more guesses at your partition size should be. They assume since it's your disk you best know how to partition it. One is free to edit the default save them to file for next time. If one wants to manage the details of a computer system with documentation describing the implications of each decision OpenBSD is perfect. There are plenty of other operating systems that will most do the right thing. How many operating systems do exactly what you tell it to?
- hulitu 3y ago> They will not look at your system and guess how you want to use it and make more guesses at your partition size should be. Then it shall have some documentation on system requirements. I tried to install Freebsd on a VM with UFS as a filesystem and the show ended with out of inodes when installing the ports system. This in 2020 is a bit sad.
- detourdog 3y agoFreeBSD is not OpenBSD. The rest of the story is sad.