LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Slackware (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)
-   -   Slackware "pure" Install (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/slackware-pure-install-854044/)

diegoj 01-03-2011 11:25 PM

Slackware "pure" Install
 
Finaly i decide to put my lazi away and make a pure install of slackware (just installing the packages i need).

Should I use ext4 or xfs? I start using ext3 then xfs and know i am thinking in ext4.

I need to know which partitions to create and how much space should I alocate for them. I used to create just swap and /.

example:
swap -> 3gb
/ -> ?
/usr -> 10gb
/root -> 500mb
/home -> all the rest?!

Is it better intalling this way? Why? To finish, Slack 64 or 32 bits?

thnks! ;)

mlangdn 01-03-2011 11:32 PM

Now you are getting into opinions, and there will be a lot of those!
For me, I use only a 2gb swap and / root partition.
I use ext4 for the fs. It used to be ext3.

Then again, xfs is a fine fs.
A separate /home makes an upgrade somewhat easier.
For me, there is no reason to split off /usr. I don't do it simply because of space economies. How could one ever know the exact size to make /usr?

diegoj 01-03-2011 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlangdn (Post 4212196)
Now you are getting into opinions, and there will be a lot of those!
For me, I use only a 2gb swap and / root partition.
I use ext4 for the fs. It used to be ext3.

Then again, xfs is a fine fs.
A separate /home makes an upgrade somewhat easier.
For me, there is no reason to split off /usr. I don't do it simply because of space economies. How could one ever know the exact size to make /usr?

Thats what i always thought. Do you know if Slack64 is stable as 32 bits? Theres is any compatibility issue? Im really unsure about which one to install...

TheIndependentAquarius 01-03-2011 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diegoj (Post 4212194)
Is it better intalling this way? Why?

If you search Google by the following keywords:
Quote:

Disk partitioning Linux
you'll get excellent links and blogs explaining you why and why not.

mlangdn 01-03-2011 11:56 PM

Slackware64 is very stable and rock-solid - just as Slackware32. Only install Slackware64 if you do not plan on running any 32 bit programs. Otherwise, you will have to go multilib.

enorbet 01-04-2011 12:20 AM

Partitioning
 
Greetz
It is a pet peeve of mine and in general Windows centric to have swap be directly proportional to ram since it should be inversely proportional unless you suspend-to-ram hibernate in which case it should be equal to ram. It's almost as windoze-y to set larges swap sizes. My box is a single core CPU with only 2G ram and 230MB swap. Even while compiling a large application and running Firefox at the same time and several other apps minimized I have never exceeded a 1% swap usage.

It is my understanding that some security minded folks advocate /tmp and /var be isolated on their own dedicated partitions even over /usr. Personally I'm not quite that anal or paranoid and prefer just root ("/" not "/root"), swap and /home be separate.

I see no compelling reason to switch to 64bit distro at this time since 32bit Linux does not suffer from the 3GB limitation that Windoze does and can handle up to 64GB ram with the PAE kernel option. Any speed advantage is minimal AFAIK and to me not worth still requiring dual sets of libraries and/or emulation. With multi-cores commonplace as well as 64bit becoming ubiquitous coding for modern systems is more complex than ever. Most companies and individuals opt to "get to market" faster by at the very least doing 32bit first. It will likely be a few years yet before 32bit drops below 64bit availability.

Just my twapence. :)

Squall90 01-04-2011 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diegoj (Post 4212194)
Finaly i decide to put my lazi away and make a pure install of slackware (just installing the packages i need).

If you really want to know what you're installing you could do the same way, I installed Slackware once I chose "menu" in the installation dialog and then I searched for every package what it do.
Okay, it took me days to do so, but now I know what I install. *g*

Quote:

Originally Posted by diegoj (Post 4212194)
Should I use ext4 or xfs? I start using ext3 then xfs and know i am thinking in ext4.

Both are fine. Chose the one you like more. Or you could do some search on Google for benchmark tests. (Something like "ext4 vs. xfs".)

Quote:

Originally Posted by diegoj (Post 4212194)
I need to know which partitions to create and how much space should I alocate for them. I used to create just swap and /.

example:
swap -> 3gb
/ -> ?
/usr -> 10gb
/root -> 500mb
/home -> all the rest?!

For me, 1 GB swap with 4 GB of ram works just fine. I don't think there's today the need for more since you have lots of ram and your system won't need that much if you don't run servers or Windows or such things. But if have big hard drive(s) then you could easily create a bigger swap.
My / is 20 GB on my Netbook on which I'm writing and on my main machine (on which I have 1.6 TB hard drive space) I have a 100Gb / partition even there's no need for it. On both machines / only take about 5GB. But if you often build packages from SlackBuilds it's better to have a bigger / if you don't have a separate /tmp partition, since building packages from source could take GBs of space.
I don't think there's need for a separate /root partition. It doesn't make any sense. You probably don't save your vacation photos, don't you?
I also think /usr in a separate partition is not needed. At least, for me there is no sense in an extra /usr partition if your / partition is big enough. But decide yourself.
/home the rest is the same way I end my partitioning. On my Netbook it's around 200GB and on my main machine it's 400GB (the biggest part is for a NTFS share partition for Windows/Linux which is rarely used. Hmm...

Quote:

Originally Posted by diegoj (Post 4212194)
Is it better installing this way? Why? To finish, Slack 64 or 32 bits?

Look for this with the forums search function. There are dozens of this discussions. In the end, it seem so, it's a choice of taste. I have not noticed any performance improvement with 64 bit but there are users out there who says thay have. Perhaps my pc is so fast that I don't really realize the improvement or I just don't care.
If you have one particular program that needs 32bit or 64bit you could go for whichever architecture this program needs.


Have fun and good look with Slackware.

enorbet 01-04-2011 01:59 AM

What You Need
 
Greetz
I just wanted to mention a POV that is in all likelihood very un-1337 of me but which I see as a tradeoff. With the single exception of hard drive space, on a SOHO Desktop box I see no value whatsoever in limiting what packages you install over going the "Everything" route including half the "Extras". Linux in general has such great memory management and Slackware in particular has such great control over running services, there really is no such thing as "bloat", IMHO.

The plus side, and likely why "Everything" is recommended right on the Installer Menu, is that you start off with a system that minimizes the need to install stuff later for dependency resolution and maximize the "./configure --with-foo" options. This is by no means trivial other than most people who don't seek out what options are available never know what they are missing.

It might be a fun challenge (and it is, actually) to build a "dune buggy" but I rather prefer a Bentley with all the goodies. The difference between the software and the analagous hardware is that the software luxury doesn't cost anything more but some hard drive space and the virtual Bentley is just as nimble, if not more so, than the Dune Buggy.

igadoter 01-04-2011 04:05 AM

Hi,
If it is your first nstallation then do what you want. The first installatio is always some kind of research about a system. It is inevitable that you will have to reinstall the system after 2 or 3 months - Yeah, many disagree - but the question is whatdo you want - running system or good running system? Hey,
stay calm.

brianL 01-04-2011 05:04 AM

I agree with what enorbet wrote in post #8. What you could do, if you want to experiment, is do a full install, get VirtualBox, and experiment with selective/minimal installs in that.

chrisretusn 01-04-2011 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlangdn (Post 4212196)
Now you are getting into opinions, and there will be a lot of those!

Agree and here is mine. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by diegoj (Post 4212194)
Finaly i decide to put my lazi away and make a pure install of slackware (just installing the packages i need).

A "pure" install of Slackware IMHO is a full install. Nothing wrong with installing only what you need, but I would call that a minimal install.

Quote:

Should I use ext4 or xfs? I start using ext3 then xfs and know i am thinking in ext4.
Your choice. I would favor a journaling file system over an non-journaling one though. If you are going to have a lot of huge files I would opt for xfs otherwise go with ext4. I prefer to use jfs.

Quote:

I need to know which partitions to create and how much space should I alocate for them. I used to create just swap and /.
Really hard to offer advice on which and especially how much space since you give us no idea what your minimal install consist of. The Slackware-HOWTO has a section called "Slackware Space Requirements" that will give you an idea on space needed for each set.

My preferences are for separate root and home partitions. I give root enough to carry everything plus a large cushion, home gets the rest. Any special purpose mounts I need are mounted under /home/

It is my opinion a 3G swap partition is bit of an overkill. Even suspend or hibernate don't normally use that much swap space. The only time I get significant usage of my swap space is if I load up several virtual machines. I have 4G of memory and a 1G swap file. I never use suspend or hibernate.

Quote:

Is it better intalling this way? Why? To finish, Slack 64 or 32 bits?
As you might guess based on my definition of "pure" Slackware, I would say go for the default full installation. This for one makes sure you will have everything you need. If you are short on space then sure, do a minimal install.

As for 64 or 32? If you are installing on a 32-bit computer then your will have to use 32-bit Slackware. If you are installing on a 64-bit computer and want to run 32-bit programs you can use 32-bit Slackware. -OR- You can install Slackware64 and install/maintain the multilib libraries. If you will not be using any 32-bit programs then just go with Slackware64.

Richard Cranium 01-04-2011 11:16 PM

Use LVM and file systems that can be made larger while mounted. LVM provides a lot of flexibility for a minor amount of complexity.

Just don't try to have /etc on a different file system than /. (Well, if you did something special in an initrd, you could get away with it.)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:59 PM.