I would like more space on /home. This is how OpenSUSE configured my partitions automatically. Would it be wise to tweak this layout to give me more space on /home?
What you show is usefull (it tells about the size of the file systems and how full they are), but it says nothing about the space on the disk (if there is more then that shown here in use).
> I would like more space on /home. This is how OpenSUSE configured my
> partitions automatically. Would it be wise to tweak this layout to give
> me more space on /home?
There is nothing in there to take space from. We need to know if there
is more space on the disk somewhere. So, the output from fdisk that Henk
suggests, or this one I like:
calvin@linux-kmee:~> su -l -c 'fdisk -l'
Password:
Disk /dev/sdb: 128.0 GB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk label type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa6533a2b
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdb1 2048 125036543 62517248 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
/dev/sdb2 125036544 250068991 62516224 f W95 Ext'd (LBA)
/dev/sdb5 125038592 129259519 2110464 82 Linux swap / Solaris
/dev/sdb6 129261568 171204607 20971520 83 Linux
/dev/sdb7 171206656 250052607 39422976 83 Linux
Disk /dev/sda: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes, 976773168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk label type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa6533a37
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 * 2048 718847 358400 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
/dev/sda2 718848 879251456 439266304+ 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
Disk /dev/sdc: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes, 3907029168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
Disk label type: dos
Disk identifier: 0x9ec44f80
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdc1 2048 3907026943 1953512448 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
Disk /dev/sdd: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes, 3907029168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
Disk label type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xeb102c3d
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdd1 * 2048 3907026943 1953512448 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
calvin@linux-kmee:~> lsblk --output NAME,FSTYPE,LABEL,UUID,PARTLABEL,PARTUUID,MOUNTPOINT,SIZE
NAME FSTYPE LABEL UUID PARTLABEL PARTUUID MOUNTPOINT SIZE
sda 465.8G
├─sda1 350M
└─sda2 418.9G
sdb 119.2G
├─sdb1 /var/run/media/calvin/Windows 59.6G
├─sdb2 1K
├─sdb5 [SWAP] 2G
├─sdb6 / 20G
└─sdb7 /home 37.6G
sdc 1.8T
└─sdc1 /var/run/media/calvin/2nd 2TB Storage 1.8T
sdd 1.8T
└─sdd1 /var/run/media/calvin/2TB Storage 1.8T
sr0 1024M
calvin@linux-kmee:~> linux-kmee:~ # fdisk -l
If 'linux-kmee:~' is not a typo you can use command-not-found to lookup the package that contains it, like this:
cnf linux-kmee:~
calvin@linux-kmee:~> fdisk -l
Absolute path to 'fdisk' is '/usr/sbin/fdisk', so running it may require superuser privileges (eg. root).
calvin@linux-kmee:~> su
Password:
linux-kmee:/home/calvin # fdisk -l
Disk /dev/sdb: 128.0 GB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk label type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa6533a2b
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdb1 2048 125036543 62517248 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
/dev/sdb2 125036544 250068991 62516224 f W95 Ext'd (LBA)
/dev/sdb5 125038592 129259519 2110464 82 Linux swap / Solaris
/dev/sdb6 129261568 171204607 20971520 83 Linux
/dev/sdb7 171206656 250052607 39422976 83 Linux
Disk /dev/sda: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes, 976773168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk label type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xa6533a37
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 * 2048 718847 358400 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
/dev/sda2 718848 879251456 439266304+ 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
Disk /dev/sdc: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes, 3907029168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
Disk label type: dos
Disk identifier: 0x9ec44f80
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdc1 2048 3907026943 1953512448 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
Disk /dev/sdd: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes, 3907029168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
Disk label type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xeb102c3d
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdd1 * 2048 3907026943 1953512448 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
linux-kmee:/home/calvin # cat /etc/fstab
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-SanDisk_SDSSDHP128G_133647402985-part5 swap swap defaults 0 0
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-SanDisk_SDSSDHP128G_133647402985-part6 / ext4 acl,user_xattr,noatime 1 1
/dev/disk/by-id/ata-SanDisk_SDSSDHP128G_133647402985-part7 /home ext4 acl,user_xattr,noatime 1 2
linux-kmee:/home/calvin # exit
exit
calvin@linux-kmee:~>
The format is a bit wonky, but there is no unallocated space on the HD, I wanted to try taking some space from the partitions suse made, I saw some were only like 1% full I so thought they had space to spare.
> The format is a bit wonky, but there is no unallocated space on the HD,
> I wanted to try taking some space from the partitions suse made, I saw
> some were only like 1% full I so thought they had space to spare.
No, that’s RAM. They are tmpfs, they reside on RAM, not disk. So, if you
want more disk space for Linux, you have to decide from what disk
partition to take it from.
You can store some of your home data on another of those Windows
partitions, and symlink it.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 “Bottle” at Telcontar)
As Carlos said. The tmpfs file systems are not on your disk.
And when you want space, you have to find it by e.g. scratching other partitions. But when you still use that Windows that seems to be on it and you need all those partitions that belong to it, there is nothing.
On 2014-03-26, Astralogic <Astralogic@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> wrote:
>
> Code:
> --------------------
> calvin@linux-kmee:~> su
> Password:
> linux-kmee:/home/calvin # fdisk -l
>
> Disk /dev/sdb: 128.0 GB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
> Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
> Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
> I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
> Disk label type: dos
> Disk identifier: 0xa6533a2b
>
> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
> /dev/sdb1 2048 125036543 62517248 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
> /dev/sdb2 125036544 250068991 62516224 f W95 Ext’d (LBA)
> /dev/sdb5 125038592 129259519 2110464 82 Linux swap / Solaris
> /dev/sdb6 129261568 171204607 20971520 83 Linux
> /dev/sdb7 171206656 250052607 39422976 83 Linux
>
> Disk /dev/sda: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes, 976773168 sectors
> Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
> Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
> I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
> Disk label type: dos
> Disk identifier: 0xa6533a37
>
> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
> /dev/sda1 * 2048 718847 358400 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
> /dev/sda2 718848 879251456 439266304+ 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
>
> Disk /dev/sdc: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes, 3907029168 sectors
> Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
> Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
> I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
> Disk label type: dos
> Disk identifier: 0x9ec44f80
>
> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
> /dev/sdc1 2048 3907026943 1953512448 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
>
> Disk /dev/sdd: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes, 3907029168 sectors
> Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
> Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
> I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
> Disk label type: dos
> Disk identifier: 0xeb102c3d
>
> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
> /dev/sdd1 * 2048 3907026943 1953512448 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
> linux-kmee:/home/calvin # cat /etc/fstab
> /dev/disk/by-id/ata-SanDisk_SDSSDHP128G_133647402985-part5 swap swap defaults 0 0
> /dev/disk/by-id/ata-SanDisk_SDSSDHP128G_133647402985-part6 / ext4 acl,user_xattr,noatime 1 1
> /dev/disk/by-id/ata-SanDisk_SDSSDHP128G_133647402985-part7 /home ext4 acl,user_xattr,noatime 1 2
> linux-kmee:/home/calvin # exit
> exit
> calvin@linux-kmee:~>
>
>
> --------------------
>
>
> The format is a bit wonky, but there is no unallocated space on the HD,
> I wanted to try taking some space from the partitions suse made, I saw
> some were only like 1% full I so thought they had space to spare.
Thanks for the output. If you are using you’re already using all your hard drive space split across Windows and
openSUSE, I strongly you recommend you don’t try to increase the size of /home/ but create a symbolic link within $HOME/
to access data within your NTFS partitions.
For example, if you mount your Window’s D' partition in /windows/D’ (which you can do within YaST’s partitioner), then
you can (as regular user):
sh-4.2$ cd ~
sh-4.2$ ln -sf /windows/D
sh-4.2$ cd D/
sh-4.2$ ls
This approach has three advantages:
Your data storage isn’t confined by the size of /home/
Your data is equally accessible from Windows and openSUSE.
You can confidently wipe /home/ upon reinstalls without having to worry about wiping data.
Well, you could do it (as you can do so many things), but I personaly would never use a non-Linux partition type for my data on a Linux system. I would only advice those types of partitions for exchange between different operating systems.
But it is personal and not everybody has the same ideas about consistancy and security that I have.
What about LVM? If he bought a new hard-drive, or had another hd around and available, could he extend his /home partition ‘space’ using LVM, even if LVM wasn’t initially set up on his system?
why use LVM?
just put your /home on BTRFS partition and you can extended on multiple devices
transparently at any time and live.
I am building a file/VM server right now andmy “/” is on BTRFS and “/home” on a separate drive BTRFS as well.
if I need more space for home later just add new disk or a partition and rebalance.
I have test it several times and it works unbelievably well.
supports RAID 0/1/5/6 also
OK, thank you. I have been a bit cautious in regard BTRFS, never tried it and don’t know much about it either really. Might be interesting for the thread starter as well, though not with his present system using ext4.
On 2014-03-26, hcvv <hcvv@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> wrote:
> Well, you could do it (as you can do so many things), but I personaly
> would never use a non-Linux partition type for my data on a Linux
> system. I would only advice those types of partitions for exchange
> between different operating systems.
>
> But it is personal and not everybody has the same ideas about
> consistancy and security that I have.
I can understand this perspective, but I think to be consistent with this point of view, you also need to:
Encrypt all ext4 partitions (including /home/) routinely.
Encrypt all backups of /home/ data.
Keep no such data on unencrypted media storage (e.g. USB pen/CF/SD/etc…)
You do the same for every data partitions of all other operating systems you use.
It may well the case you may observe all such measures. In my opinion there’s no more security associated with an
unencrypted Linux partition compared to a unencrypted non-Linux partition. You can just boot up with any live media and
read/write unencrypted partitions whether or not they are Linux-based.
In practice I believe there are many instances where encryption is not only unnecessarily but potentially harmful. For
example, you may regret being too stringent on security on home family computer or a hobby desktop with nothing
particular sensitive especially if the password and get yourself into trouble with family members! On the other hand a
corporate laptop is a prime case for requiring encryption but I don’t know how many corporate laptops have Linux
installed on them…
On 2014-03-27 00:40, flymail wrote:
> On 2014-03-26, hcvv <> wrote:
>> But it is personal and not everybody has the same ideas about
>> consistancy and security that I have.
>
> I can understand this perspective, but I think to be consistent with this point of view, you also need to:
>
> 1. Encrypt all ext4 partitions (including /home/) routinely.
There are two meanings of “security”: secrecy, or reliability.
I guess that hcvv simply doesn’t trust Microsoft filesystems, specially
accessed from Linux
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 “Bottle” at Telcontar)
I simply mean the fact that there are no owners and permissions on those file systems. Nothing more. But it gives me an unsafe feeling and many users here a lot of problems (search the forums for "I can not wite on my NTFS/…)
On 2014-03-27, hcvv <hcvv@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> wrote:
> I simply mean the fact that there are no owners and permissions on those
> file systems. Nothing more. But it gives me an unsafe feeling and many
> users here a lot of problems (search the forums for "I can not wite on
> my NTFS/…)
Ahh I see your point. I think the facility to control permissions of mount points at the level of /etc/fstab goes a long
way in mitigating such concerns (at least for me). Of course this isn’t a particularly useful option for an isolated
Linux system. But those who dual boot and need access to data from `both sides’, it really makes a lot of sense to
symlink within $HOME/ to a devoted data ntfs partition while at the time mapping a shortcut within Windows’ My Documents
to the same location. The fact that you have to use ntfs in this case isn’t the fault of GNU/Linux but because Windows
can neither read nor write within ext4 filesystems.
I can follow you, but I do not understand your concept of “isolated Linux system”. My Linux systems are fully connected to each other through the LAN and with the outside world through the internet. Nothing isolated.
Also I would never use a non-Linux file system as /home, nor mounted (or symlinked) as the home directory of any user. I would maybe do it onto a subdirectory of a users home directory and clearly explain the restrictions of that part of hisher.diskspace.
On 2014-03-27 12:16, hcvv wrote:
> Also I would never use a non-Linux file system as /home, nor mounted (or
> symlinked) as the home directory of any user.
He is not saying that, either. But it typical for people having to
double boot to share documents between both systems. A convenient way is
to put the Document folder on an ntfs partition, or any other folder
data you like. Just not home.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 “Bottle” at Telcontar)
