Recommended Partition Layout

[MetalHead]

Hi..

What would you guys recommend for the best partition layout for a desktop system?

I'm using:

/
/swap
/tmp
/var
/usr
/home

What about /usr/local instead of /usr ? Any disadvantages or advantages ?

I'm getting ready to install OPBSD on a new computer and I'm wondering what the best partition layout is.

Thanks in advance..

[J65nko]

If you create an /usr/local instead of an /usr, then the installer will create an /usr in the root partition '/'.

If you plan to use the OBSD ports system a lot, then you could create an "/usr" as well as an "/usr/ports".

[MetalHead]

Originally Posted by J65nko

If you create an /usr/local instead of an /usr, then the installer will create an /usr in the root partition '/'.

Is that a good or a bad thing?

If you plan to use the OBSD ports system a lot, then you could create an "/usr" as well as an "/usr/ports".

How about this..

/
/tmp
/var
/usr/local
/usr/ports
/home

TIA

P.S.

What would you recomend? If using OPBSD as a desktop how do you have your partition table layed out?

[J65nko]

I only would add an /usr

/
/tmp
/var
/usr
/usr/local
/usr/ports
/home

Now the next question: how many MB or GB for each partition?

[MetalHead]

Originally Posted by J65nko

I only would add an /usr

/
/tmp
/var
/usr
/usr/local
/usr/ports
/home

Now the next question: how many MB or GB for each partition?

Thanks! I think I have the MG/GB figured out....Just needed the correct layout....

[ocicat]

Originally Posted by MetalHead

Thanks! I think I have the MG/GB figured out....Just needed the correct layout....

Given that you have specified /usr/ports, gives the impression that you anticipate building ports. If you also intend to ever build the kernel, userland, or Xenocara, then you should also consider making partitions for:

• /usr/src
• /usr/obj
• /usr/xenocara
• /usr/xobj

[Oko]

It is little bit off topic but I always like to keep /home on the separate hard drive. That is just me.

[jggimi]

jggimi's recommended procedure for partition planning for any new environment that has unknown capacity requirements.

Step 1: Set aside all preconceived notions of disk space requirements for any individual partition. Ignore anything anyone tells you is "typical" sizing requirements.

Step 2: Install everything in a single, great big root partition. Don't worry, this is temporary.

Step 3: Use the application set / environment for some length of time: days, weeks, months, as needed.

Step 4: By using du(1), determine what your hierarchy is actually consuming.

Step 5: Reinstall with your final configuration, or back up - reconfigure - restore.

[TerryP]

jggimi I think, has just given you the best advice anyone can without knowing your situation in detail.

If you search J65nko's posts for topics like these, you'll also turn up some very good advice on finding just what you can pull off. Most systems at home won't need much, but adopting partitioning to machine purpose is helpful.


Personally, I prefer to have /usr/src and /usr/obj be network mounts where applicable, and split /usr and /usr/local into separate areas of my disks.

[ivanatora]

Why not keep everything at one place?
Is this a desktop machine or kind of a server?
IMHO, playing around with a hard drive with a multiple data partitions is not as easy as it sounds. Nor productive. There is always a time when you run out of space to some of your partitions (be it a /home, or /usr or /var...) and the situation is narrow - you can't borrow space from some other partition even if you have plenty. So you delete files or add another hard drive. Both of these is too stupid when you have free space at the other partitions.
Ofcourse someone could do the math before installing the system and split his harddrive into 10 slices with a megabyte precision. Then after X months he runs out of space. Always. Desktop machine == data grow.
Using a simple / partition is a solution to many problems.

[BSDfan666]

Originally Posted by ivanatora

Using a simple / partition is a solution to many problems.

But you miss out on the bonus security benefits.. like mount point specific options. (nosuid, nodev.. noexec, etc)

It's always recommended to create separate partitions... it's fine creating one large / partition at first, but once you get used to the system, you'll find it worthwhile to create more.

[jggimi]

I recommended a single partition, above. For initial use and final layout determination.

FAQ 4.7 -- therefore the OpenBSD Project -- recommends partitioning as a best practice, for reasons of security, stability, speed, integrity, and size. It too, includes the recommendation of single-large-partition, prior to production.

I have systems that are permanently configured with a single large partition, including the laptop I am using to type this. But none of these systems are exposed directly to the Internet, and none run production services. Systems that run services, or are exposed, or both, are partitioned.

[ivanatora]

Yes, you both are correct that I'm not right for production servers. I was talked about home desktop systems, because it is what MetalHead needs.