From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (unknown [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4200A1381FA for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 11:07:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F07F4E0A69; Fri, 16 May 2014 11:07:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f176.google.com (mail-wi0-f176.google.com [209.85.212.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C36D3E0A10 for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 11:07:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id n15so746473wiw.15 for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 04:07:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=CnqAf9EJkMYmX4JgsQHQ4392TqROI5XYjN796RqXHRU=; b=o5NZje5sVObAihVhNQem8t7guabuqWqw0vUyzQTFfjNLEdL965BBaAfs5StXhkqTVo /MwVyEsY0rbeBC7aNvEzDgcL5pB5wwI4eNfdA+iUXRP/00xHj//tiwpEhfUW6QQhAmqw VDYe4w+J1HbBnMK1DC7rbUv3zzl2sGpMCFr42dQkKbizdoLpDEltQBAU4XNs8yd/VKxt UhOO8xa0cCWBblZu4bKqhuESp21KyPmzjuCCK18Sk7B7JwKiOkx+iilfuQjRK20PRNRh qdMbndr132URBi6CeU2ifLw3wMA0Irytd5CHFzPUN0bXjq8L36wRrGmQC31HJQlvcau/ a2NQ== X-Received: by 10.194.190.42 with SMTP id gn10mr13637890wjc.9.1400238436585; Fri, 16 May 2014 04:07:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.20.201] (dustpuppy.is.co.za. [196.14.169.11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fo10sm2787140wib.12.2014.05.16.04.07.15 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 16 May 2014 04:07:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5375F141.5080704@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 13:06:41 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] boot problems References: <5364C0F9.3000906@xunil.at> <2219291.LPmZhmqkJ1@andromeda> <536545AB.2060008@xunil.at> <53672D31.1030108@xunil.at> <53746809.9080604@xunil.at> <5374855C.4040203@xunil.at> <537506FE.3090701@xunil.at> <5375DE75.7070501@xunil.at> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: caaaa424-2b04-438b-bba5-91285705d1c9 X-Archives-Hash: 8cad74d34f8101fb4e85892752fd7b93 On 16/05/2014 12:04, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > Whatever gets rid of LVM is good on my book. I've never understood why > people uses it, and in my experience it only brings headaches. > Besides, I've heard from many people that btrfs is the way to go in > the future. I'm not ready to make the change yet, but I will at some > point. LVM is an excellent solution for what it was designed to do, which is to deal with stuff like this: Oops. I misjudged how big /var/log needed to be and now I need to add 50G to that partition. But it's sda6 and I have up to sda8. Arggghhhhh! Now I need 5 hour downtime to play 15-pieces with fdisk. LVM makes that 2 commands and 12 seconds. Yes, it's a bit complex and you have to hold the PV/VG/LV model in your head, but it also *fixes* the issue with rigid MSDOS partition style. Modern filesystems like ZFS and btrfs sidestep the need for LVM in a really elegant and wonderful way, none of which changes the fact that ZFS/btrfs weren't around when LVM was first coded. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com