From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-127220-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1QvCZA-0007jk-2b
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 18:16:12 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1A49021C08F;
Sun, 21 Aug 2011 18:16:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-gw0-f53.google.com (mail-gw0-f53.google.com [74.125.83.53])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 516BA21C044
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 18:14:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by gwj20 with SMTP id 20so3388686gwj.40
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 11:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type;
bh=zxC288/511+yd24CBewo80MXi0e+gpJEzEyW1rikef4=;
b=RnH4wMAECnfGOLXsx58MHi0CHG0kkxu+x/kFgpnUonwzwICaNKFUOGTWlaqez//aWP
rGYEvvbY1eJ0SvYxIOpm1K8iw0Rs+E1rey+LG57Ya0EoX4mHnv6ekM2iyiyOuTCVbJkL
+yDdlTQgGhoXQTxp4K1D6prd1FN8OvnMT6O5c=
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.236.145.130 with SMTP id p2mr8740409yhj.125.1313950493764;
Sun, 21 Aug 2011 11:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.207.67 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 11:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E50E20F.7000607@alyf.net>
References: <CAE1pOi3Xo4DMx2=15vrXJBP215u8YZwS7UCQbq2z0zALhrS4rQ@mail.gmail.com>
<6772.1313891543@ccs.covici.com>
<CAE1pOi2pWhv4BCvPL08rO8cWdbn487q9s5QGfcS2p_CP=d_9GQ@mail.gmail.com>
<4E5087D1.2070503@nileshgr.com>
<CAE1pOi3_GEUuxHvyqan=CxZVEcoUKWd3o2kr=dM+sCpqrtRzxw@mail.gmail.com>
<4E50E20F.7000607@alyf.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 11:14:53 -0700
Message-ID: <CAE1pOi0Cp6nT_v9mjfL-6JrgEuFruAwqx25eEay4xK9ohrhkdg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] [Gentoo install] Disk full at 35%?
From: Hilco Wijbenga <hilco.wijbenga@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt:
X-Archives-Hash: 42e15034583b1803848faa3f408e7402
On 21 August 2011 03:46, Andrea Conti <alyf@alyf.net> wrote:
>> If you run man mke2fs, you should check out -N and -i. It was
>> trial-and-error (for me, anyway) to find the right number.
>
> Consider using reiserfs for /usr/portage. No real performance advantage
> over ext[234], but works well with lots of small files and there's no
> inode count to worry about.
>
> In my experience the main downside of reiserfs is that fsck.reiserfs is
> almost never able to recover cleanly if the filesystem metadata does get
> corrupted in a non-trivial way. But for the portage snapshot this isn't
> really a problem...
I have always used ReiserFS for everything but /boot. That explains
why I never ran into the inode issue, I guess.
I'm trying to install AMD64 and the handbook says that ([1]) "JFS and
ReiserFS may work but need more testing. If you're really adventurous
you can try the other filesystems.". That didn't sound too promising
so I went with ext3. :-)
The X86 handbook doesn't have this text. Is ReiserFS on AMD64 really
only for the adventurous? Or should this warning be removed?
[1] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-amd64.xml?part=1&chap=4#filesystemsdesc