Description of problem:
Possible omission. If one is trying to obtain better performance or smoother sys
admin, adding partitions is suggested in various places, but never as a set of
While hot controversy continues to exist on the subject, and a partitioning
strategy depends on how the system is to be used, some notes about the limits of
sanity might make the guide better. With today's huge hard drives (even in
modest desktop systems), people can afford to err on the side of being too large.
For example, some people think a gig is a nice round number, appropriate for
/boot/, say. Others (including anaconda) put it at a 10th that size. Which makes
sense when you consider it's job and how many times you are likely to add to
it... how many kernels are you going to seriously consider choosing from?
Reasons for separate /usr/, /var/, /tmp/, /home/ may be mentioned (I spent hours
looking for advice on this, can't recall who says what), but there must be upper
limits for /var/ and /tmp/ after which space is being squandered. Is it 5 gig?
People contemplating wine may wonder if they need an NTFS or vFAT partition.
They don't, according to wine FAQ 3.10.
People contemplating a file server might want partitions for /www/, /ftp/,
/srv/, or whatever. Should they fear a name conflict with future releases? Is
there an emerging standard?
I realize this matter is unsettled and probably deserves it's own document. It
might be inappropriate to give advice on the matter. Still, a couple of links to
the better pages, and a few words about what is going too far might be helpful,
if properly disclaimed.
Thank you for the guide, I really like it.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
Information discussing partitioning approaches has been added in CVS and should
appear in the F7 IG. Thank you for your suggestions.