Partition ubuntu

[wombil]

Hey Guys,I have downloaded and am using ubuntu 10.10 I like the option of loading updates and some accessory software at installation tho it takes a while to do.Bit overloaded with password opening too but I got rid of all that ok and I am really happy with the OS.My question is,"Is there any advantage in partitioning this drive as with windows installations"?
Thanks for looking.

[jlreich]

I usually have a separate root and home partition and of course the small swap partition. Root will have system files and all your programs, and home will have all your data as well as most configuration/save files for any programs you install.

But it isn't necessary. The chances of linux getting a virus and hosing the system partition is far less than with windows. And ext4, the default file system for 10.xx, is very robust in my opinion. Also if your drive is smallish it can be difficult to figure out how much to allocate to each partition.

The only real advantage I can see is if your are doing any imaging of partitions. Smaller partitions are quicker to image and easier to store.

As with any partitioning question others will undoubtedly have their own valid opinions of how and why to do it or not to do it. :)

[mjc]

I usually make a 'storage' partition that I put downloads, installers, packages and such on. I currently have a 'media' partition that has all the movie and music files, in addition to the 'storage' one. I usually make these NTFS or FAT32 so Windows can also use them without any additional drivers or such.

I keep saying I'm going to make a separate WINE partition...but somehow never do.

[jlreich]

That's a pretty good idea. I have tons of NTFS partitions on other drives already so I just save anything that I want windows to be able to get to on a NTFS data partition. My media server is XP based so all my movies and such are already setup for access from everything. It all just depends on your particular setup and how you like to do things. Sooooo many ways to setup partitions. :)

With five drives and multiple partitions on every drive it has gotten out of hand honestly. Ever fell like just nuking everything except photos and videos and starting completely fresh? :p

[wombil]

Yes,I only have 3 drives with a couple partitions on each and its a bit of a toss up working out which is which sometimes. Think I'll leave it at one partition,plenty of folders Thanks Guys.

[mjc]

Ever fell like just nuking everything except photos and videos and starting completely fresh? :p

Umm...about every other day...then I realize how much work it will be getting it all back up and running again. Then I decide that it can wait a little longer...:D

[Paul Komski]

Partitioning and Backup strategies are not at all dissimilar in Windows or Linux though as already mentioned if non-Linux systems are to also access data then that data should be kept on an appropriately formatted partition.

With the exception of a swap partition I personally seldom partition Linux installations, with the exception of one for the the /home directory, where all one's data would normally be kept; it is usually one's data that is most precious. In the event of a clean reinstall the old /home directory can be left intact or backed-up externally separate from the rest.

P.S.
On a side note with regard to Ubuntu - I am more and more impressed with where it has go to with 10.10. Having spend the best part of two days trying to clean reinstall Vista onto a Toshiba Satellite (first grabbing drivers was hard and then activation was a nightmare) with a perfectly good COA on the bottom I gave up when I couldn't even downgrade to WinXP because I couldn't source the drivers. Installed Ubuntu and it found every single bit of hardware with functioning LAN, Wifi and Roaming BB out of the box! The only way to have got back a functioning Vista was to have sent €36 to Toshiba for a restoration DVD. The owners are, so far anyway, delighted with the change to Linux noting in particular how much faster everything now was.

[wombil]

I found that out trying to configure HP printer.Everything I needed was already done at 10.10 installation

[jlreich]

I have been running 10.04 for some time and love it. I have 10.10 loaded in a VM but haven't really messed with it much. Thought about upgrading but not seeing anything compelling to go through the trouble. And 10.04 is an LTS (long term support: 3 years) version, so will stick with it for now. :)

Except for some initial issues with ATI drivers I haven't had a bit of trouble out of it.

I have a long time customer that I built/donated an older system to about a year or so ago running Ultimate Edition 8.xx LTS and he and his entire family love it from what he tells me. Gave him my old 6800GS video card which is quite good enough to run Compiz 3D desktop. Only issue he had was when one of his kids put it in hibernation and it didn't want to boot. He brought it over and I fixed it in a few minutes and told him not to use hibernation. After that he hasn't had any problems. Which is great because honestly I half expected him to have issues and put windows back on it. But they love it. :)

[Paul Komski]

My biggest problem with 10.04 was mainly that the manual setting-up of partitions during setup and the siting of GRUB to not be on the MBR let to inconsistencies (with quite different drop down list choices appearing on subsequent installations when having attempted identical partitioning choices) and difficulties that seem to have been resolved in 10.10.

I agree that hibernation seems weird and how to get back out of it not obvious. It seemed to me that you have to press the power button at least twice; once to start-up and then to take it from a black screen to a continuing boot process. It was as if you went from off to desktop via some sort of stand-by mode. I know we are off-topic by now but would value any other thoughts on this. Certainly going from Desktop to Hibernation was very quick.

[jlreich]

There were those issues with Grub that we talked about in that other thread, though they didn't effect me due to the way I setup my system anyway, and I don't think they would effect the majority of users.

It is speculation really, but I think it is highly possible with the latest ISO update, and possibly the one before that, they have fixed it. And those fixes are in the latest ISO version of 10.04.2. I saw it was released the other day but kind of glossed over it because they said the fixes were included in regular updating of an existing system and no need to reinstall or anything.

But again I really didn't look through to see what major fixes they did, so it could have nothing to do with this issue.

I never really tried hibernation or standby in Ubuntu. It is not something I use on my main systems. I use hibernation extensively on my XP work laptop because I am out in the field going from one customer to the next and don't want to have to do a full boot just to look up a small piece of information several times a day.

The issue with my customer was fixed by simply choosing an older kernel in the boot menu during startup. Once it booted successfully I restarted and booted into the latest kernel without issue. I have done that on more than one occasion with odd booting issues with 8.xx. Fortunately I have not ran into those kinds of issues with 10.xx. I pretty much skipped over 9.xx.

You know what though, you have me curious about hibernation in ubuntu, I just tried it with 10.10 in a VM and it came back to the desktop right away without any issues. Will give it a go with my real install of 10.04 later and see what happens. I have been turning my system off when I go to work, I may just give hibernation another try for awhile instead. :)

[Paul Komski]

I think I've worked out what was happening on my systems when hibernated. This was both originally with 10.10 on a client's box and now with 10.04 on my laptop. On both I had not changed the default screensaver from "blank screen". When coming out of hibernation it is to a screensaver and when this is removed by any action there sits a log-in prompt (despite being configured to log-in automatically. This was easily checked by setting a visible screensaver.

I won't be bothered using this feature however since it took 25" to hibernate but only 6" to simply turn off. Then (with zero GRUB menu delay) 45" to get to the screensaver coming out of hibernation and 51" to get automatically to the desktop from scratch.

I suspect those of thus that like hibernation in Windows systems is because we have set loads of apps to load at startup. Perhaps there would be a parallel with Linux except that fewer apps seem to want to give themselves this head start automatically when installed. Yes the old its a feature not a bug!

[jlreich]

I tried hibernation on my real install and as you said it took pretty much just as long as a normal shutdown and boot up. No advantage there. Also I had no IP when it came back up. For some odd reason "auto ethernet" was unticked and Firestarter firewall was not running. :confused:

Oh well, like I said not something I use anyway. :)