I should have gotten a new computer from New Egg, but I didn't. My bad.

Instead I bought myself an HP Omen. The ONLY drive is a 2TB SSD, with only about 1 TB of usable space, NO HDD, and no CD drive. yeah.... bad idea.

In the past, I just inserted a netinstall disk, and just killed all the Microsoft nonsense without ever booting into Windows. I took some time, as I had to get a netinstall on a flash drive, and work from there.

However, I screwed up and created a /home/{username} partition on the SSD. Now I want to reinstall the system, and make /home/{username} on /dev/sda1. It would make my life slightly easier, but I do dread having to do, yet another, reinstall.

1: could I just copy /home/{username} to /dev/sda1 and, via gparted, kill the /home/{username} on the SSD partition?
2: Will this actually work, or am I missing something important?

Just asking.

Have yourself a fantastic day!

Why is that bad? Is Windows using the rest of the space? If not, what is? Aren't you planning to remove, or have you already removed, Windows?

How is that bad? You said you only have SSD. You've left out information about what you did, and have, and motivation.

Yes, sort of. One doesn't copy directory trees to partitions, but to filesystems.

Gparted is for partitioning, not file/directory deletion. If /home is on a filesystem of its own, then removal via Gparted is one appropriate method.

Subject to the nuance corrections, it should work, but why not keep /home on the SSD? If the SSD is really an NVME, you'll be giving up a tremendous potential speed advantage moving /home to HDD.

With only a 2TB SSD..... obviously /home has to go on it.

What partitioning scheme is on the SSD?

If you only gave it a single partition (/dev/sda1) then that is where /home will be.

You could shrink the first partition, create a second partition, then put /home on it, by altering /etc/fstab entries.

But if you're not sure, it will be easiest to just reinstall, giving it the partitioning scheme that you do want.

As root post the output of the following:
parted -l
df -h
lsblk -f
cat /etc/fstab

The /home/{username} directory is very small, as it only includes configuration files for applications.

It is a minor pain in the {butt} to do my daily backups, but do have a crontab that runs once an hour to copy the contents of my /home/{username} to my /home/PUBLIC/{username}, and my daily backups get backed up to my 8TB external HHD.

The current setup is all my fault, and if/when I do a reinstall it will be quite easy to put everything back to "normal" when/if I do a reinstall.

It works for me now, though, but it is a non-standard setup.

My Drives:

1 2TB SSD
2 3TB HDD
1 8TB external HDD
1 external CD/DVD RW drive

and I have 2 additional 3 TB HDD sitting in a metal box {call it a Faraday box} unused currently.

mrmazda:

Yes the SSD is a /dev/nvme..... partition.

Have a great day!

Just a few notes/suggestions.

1] 25% - 50% Free Space for SSDs (each partition) is very good. If you hit 20% move stuff or expand that partition.

2] 16TB is plenty of space for most use cases, especially with 3-6TB external available. Movies and games take up the most space. Are you working/playing with those? If so watch your /home directory for growth and symlink where needed to increase usable space so you don't exceed 75% usage.

3] Reinstall if you think you will gain something but using a Live disk like liveslak (which has GParted by default) should allow you to resize and transpose safely and effectively without losing your existing efforts.

Best Wishes

Also, with EVERY computer since 2005, the first thing I did was to insert a Linux install disk which killed the pre-installed Windows, hopefully painfully...

I was working for Sun Microsystems in the late 1990s till 2001, and I bought myself a Solaris machine, with 2 separate processors, NOT a single processor with 2 cores. At that time, I though it was "cool".

Random question: What is better an 8-core processor or 8 single core processors?

In my best guess, I would say that the 8 single core processors would be better.

Apples and oranges. I don't think one can directly compare only core counts. "Better" has numerous attributes and options like thermal, TDP, cache. etc. I used a SuperMicro dual PIII system for audio recording and editing during that same period and it was cool... literally, with 2 massive HS/Fans but I chose PIII over Xeon exactly for less power requirements and better thermals. It wasn't CPU bound but even a 4 disk SCSI RAID was a bottleneck. I think we have to design with system balance in mind.

Separate CPU/Cores CAN be "better" but smaller dies is a huge factor. Now that specific kinds of cores are becoming more common, even on embedded SBCs, it makes even less difference if they "are in one box" or spread out. Timings at modern clock speeds demands short transmission lines.

In general, I like to use approximately 50% of my HDD space. One upon a time I had to delete things when my HDD space got too full, thus that is why I have the 3TB HDDs, the backups are another thing, though, since, when I get around to incremental backups, they will be about 80%-90% full......

There is a slight advantage to having a multi-core CPU rather than multiple single core CPUs, inter process communication or thread interaction (when used) can be faster WITHIN a CPU. The better advantage is with multiple multi-core CPUs, but I have only seen that used on server class machines, and not the cheap ones. Most commodity applications that do not require massive performance do not stress current fast multi-core processors anyway, but that depends what you are using them for.

Well, after some thought, I will not do a reinstall unless I really NEED to do it. And then I will set it up properly.

Thank you all for your advice, and have a glorious day!

When you do, backup your home and anything you really value first and ENJOY it. The ease of installing compared to earlier operating systems is one of the joys of the modern operating system. I reinstall often, just to clean up stuff I accumulate and try new things. I will probably have to cut back a but, continuous reinstall is not good for SSD lifespan.

Thank you.
I guess a SSD is probably better than a HDD, but after having my first SSD, I am not really "into it".
Although I am certainly not a Luddite, I think that most people trust SSDs more than they should. Every year or so, I buy replacement HDDs for my current ones, just in case. That way I will never be caught with a dead/dying HDD one day. {Yes, it happened ONCE... never more...}

I am going to call this thread [SOLVED]

Have a great day!

{crap} it seems that I cannot label this thread as [solved].

What's up with that?