Re: New UDB Drive
Martin Radford (M.P.Radford@exeter.ac.uk)
Thu, 31 Oct 1996 11:01:51 +0000 (GMT)
>
>I recently purchased a UDB that has no internal Hard Drive. I didn't
>thik it would be a bad deal because I figured that 340mb would be a
>little small and I would install a bit bigger one. With all the talk
>about replacing the internal drive I'm beginning to see that I was right
>that 340mb would be too small. I am also seing that I might have been
>wrong to think that putting a drive in it would not be a big deal.
>
>Since I have bought the box this way, and I cannot use it without a hard
>drive, I am wondering if I would be better off to not install an internal
>drive at all, and just buy an external hd to hook up to it. Portability
>isn't a necessity for me, but I thought it might be kind of nice. Also
>I'm wondering how big of a hard drive is big enough. obviously the
>answer is always "buy as big of a hard drive as you can afford". I
>wondering what the approximate amount of disk space taken up by red hat
>linux and x windows is. I will then be able to guage how big of a hard
>drive is reasonable for me to buy.
I have a UDB with a 1GB disk - I think its about half-full at the moment.
I installed a fair amount of RedHat 3.0.3, and obviously I've got some
user files on there as well. I imagine RH 4.0 will take up less space
as it's all ELF (so it uses shared libraries, saving disk space)
whereas all binaries on 3.0.3 are statically linked and huge.
I'm not sure what you need to do with your box, but I'd say it would
be best to get at least 1GB, but other than that, "get the biggest you
can afford" :-)
Martin
--
Martin Radford: M.P.Radford@exeter.ac.uk
Student of Computer Science at the University of Exeter, UK.
--
To unsubscribe: mail -s unsubscribe axp-list-request@redhat.com < /dev/null
Feedback |
Store |
News |
Support |
Product Errata |
About Us |
Linux Info |
Search |
JumpWords
No Frames |
Show Frames
Copyright © 1995-1997 Red Hat Software. Legal notices