Re: [Rule-list] Successful install of V0.1.1 on PC 14

[Martin Stricker]

address@hidden wrote:

> I partitioned 64M swap, 32M boot, remainder /
> 
> This is probably larger than boot needs to be. Any comments?

For a single kernel even 16 MB would be plenty. Just look at the file
sizes, du will help.

> According to Slack a good rule of thumb is swap doubles your
> memory. That's what I did here. Would this hold true for 16M or 8M
> systems? Would it hurt and 8M system to use 64M swap?

Yes, it's a rule of thumb. I would prefer to have *at least* 64 MB swap,
whatever my memory size is. Look at the output of free with different
swap and memory sizes (boot parameter mem=xxM restricts the kernel) to
get an impression of how much the things you run do need for memory.

> I think we have to recommend partition sizes. Making this decision is
> difficult for someone new to linux.

Swap twice thhe memory size, but at least 64 MB, with more than 128 MB
memory you don't need swap at all if only the minimal RULE packages are
installed.
/boot 16 or 32 MB
/ *at least* 300 MB, or the installer will whine even if nothing else
than Low Memory is selected, the installer calculates the needed size
quite bad.

> If possible it would be nice to have a partiton script. Will fdisk
> accept commands from a file? A partiton script would also ensure that
> mkswap and mke2fs were run and the mount points specified
> correctly.

I don't know.

> I like nano better than vi anyway. Coming from a world of DOS
> editors nano was much more natural for me to use. We need vi and
> emacs running but I vote for nano on the menu. For rule the ease of
> use factor is most important.

That depends on your definition of "ease of use". Personally I find
Emacs to be the easiest to use editor... ;-)) *ducks and runs*

Best regards,
Martin Stricker
-- 
Homepage: http://www.martin-stricker.de/
Red Hat Linux 7.2 for low memory: http://www.freesoftware.fsf.org/rule/
Registered Linux user #210635: http://counter.li.org/