It turns out that it's not so simple to increase the size of root - but I figured it out. And otherwise Trisquel is unusable...
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios
LOL, it turns out that it's not so simple after all. I tried those steps I mentioned in my previous post after reinitializing the drive, no dice. Reinitialized it again, and opted to add LVM, then finished, logged in, did sudo -i, and tried to use lvresize as root. /home had to be unmounted, and it was busy, probably washing its hair. Long story made short, you have to get into recovery mode, which gets you a root prompt - and *then* and only then can you use lvresize to decrease /home and add the space to root. I moved 300GB of space, that should be enough.
Two days doing this. It's no surprise that no one within 400 miles uses Trisquel - the closest Linux user group still extant is in Denver, and I think they have about three people. Gnu.org has been unreachable since Friday, and that happened for all of last weekend too - I guess they shut everything off and turn the lights off on Friday at 5pm, and then (maybe) show up again on Mondays. And mirrors for GNU stuff are pretty limited,if gnu.org is down, Codeberg is useless. So there's github/emacsmirrors and the repository at Uni Erlangen, and that's about it if gnu.org is unreachable.
I wouldn't recommend Trisquel to anyone, the gang of shmendricks who designed the installer ought to figure out that the root size should be able to be set in the installer - or just set to 200GB, so people can just use it and not screw around with all of this nonsense. Most people won't, they'll go back to non-free software because free software is just too much of a pain in the ass for non-Unix guru types, and people who get obsessed with doing things, and won't take no for an answer. That's what got me through a PhD (physical/organic/computational chemistry) in four years... Most people aren't nuts like that, and they'll have a brush with free software and avoid it like the plague thereafter.
Seriously, the people who engineer and document this stuff have a long, long way to go before it will get any sort of general acceptance - which seems to be the stated goal of the free software movement. Just that one little fix to the installer makes Trisquel useful in 2025, and that's about all it would take, keeping the root partition at 25GB is absolute fscking insanity in light of the fact that lots of software has a lot of files installed at root - and you can rarely find 32GB sd cards around. I don't know who is in charge of Trisquel, but they need to wake up from that Rip van Winkle snooze and get with it.
Someone posted in reply to my prior comment about using a Ubiquity OS stick for an encrypted drive, and lists out a long, long sequence of events and actions to get to the same result that I got with using lvresize twice. I think that the post was some sort of practical joke...
I am a translator!
> /home had to be unmounted, and it was busy, probably washing its hair. Long story made short, you have to get into recovery mode, which gets you a root prompt - and *then* and only then can you use lvresize to decrease /home and add the space to root.
As explained at https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/how-resize-trisquels-default-encrypted-partitions, you need to boot from a live USB. You should not try to resize any file system of an installed system while running it.
> Gnu.org has been unreachable since Friday, and that happened for all of last weekend too - I guess they shut everything off and turn the lights off on Friday at 5pm
Trisquel does not depend on gnu.org, and www.gnu.org responds fine right now. Trisquel has many mirrors. If one of them is temporarily not accessible, you can switch to another one.
> the root size should be able to be set in the installer - or just set to 200GB, so people can just use it and not screw around with all of this nonsense
Some people have 256 GB disks, or smaller, so a 200 GB root would be unsuitable for them. My personal view is that, for most users, the potential benefits of a separate home partition are much lower than its potential burdens, so the default recipe should not make a separate home partition. If you use the netinstaller, this is what is proposed by default.
If you want to get broad acceptance and use of Trisquel, you won't insist that the prospective user go through the long and involved procedure that you set out in https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/how-resize-trisquels-default-encrypted-partitions. And maybe the user doesn't want encrypted partitions - with the complications they bring in, such as another passphrase to keep track of. That's the case unless you're aiming at a niche group of prospective users - which is going to put a limit on the lifetime of the Trisquel project. And finally, it's just a lot easier to give the user that choice at the outset - and make it a simple choice. This isn't rocket science, you don't want to run prospective users through a lot of difficulty, because you'll lose them - forever - and they'll tell others of their negative experience. A 1 TB SSD goes for about $60 now, btw.
Probably the thing to do is set up LVM as default, with an option for encrypted partitions, and give the user a choice of partition sizes, with some guidance as to each choice - but setting root at 25GB is just setting people up for failure, and they'll just dump Trisquel and go back to Debian or Ubuntu or whatever.
Here's another user looking for an easy way to set up an encrypted partition - https://trisquel.info/en/forum/puis-je-installer-un-trisquel-chiffr%C3%A9-sur-une-partition-donn%C3%A9e-avec-linstalleur - and you refer him to an old version of the installer. He makes a suggestion as to a simple fix, and you elide it. You shouldn't do this to people if you're looking for broad acceptance and use.
And still yet another user running into one of the same problems I had when using Gparted - he eventually used recovery mode which fixed the problem, the same as for me - but it would be a lot easier just to set a reasonable and useful root partition size at the outset - https://trisquel.info/en/forum/volume-group-vgtrisquel-not-found
- "I wouldn't recommend Trisquel to anyone, the gang of shmendricks who designed the installer ought to figure out that the root size should be able to be set in the installer"
I set my root, /, at 55.58 GiB and /home at 875.63 GiB. I just had to click on 'Do something else' to do my partitioning manually. I select ext4 just because I trust it. If I need to install a new OS or reinstall I will put it in the first partition and just mount the second again at /home. I installed the up and coming Trisquel 11 on a second hard drive and partitioned it the same way.
I never wanted to learn LVM. Currently / is only using 13.91 GiB.
Trisquel has been really rock solid for me. Have been using it for around 10 years.
Thanks for the contribution of 'shmendricks' to our vocabulary.
@OP
I think you will find that given the abuses of proprietary operating systems, people will more and more move away from proprietary software.
Windows 10 or winbugs 10 as I call it and especially Winbugs 11 are inundated with crap. Winbugs 11 in particular has this feature called copilot which takes a snapshot of your computer every min. That is insane and people are afraid microsoft will turn it on by default. So I don't agree with your assessment.
There are other distros anyhow.
So your thoughts on trisquel may make sense to some people, but it doesn't mean people will automatically go back to winbugs, crapple or gaggle (google)
But I do know adding memory to different partitions can be somewhat complicated. Even still, the abuses of proprietary software are growing.
So just take that into context.
I've never used Windoze - or MS-DOS. The constantly-occurring BSOD is why I got my first Mac in October 1989. Before then, I'd been using remote terminals to log into UNIX systems - since I got my first timesharing account in 1978 - after I'd got the top "A" in my assembly language course, making a microcomputer simulator with 1800 cards on a keypunch machine - only had to replace 3 cards and it worked. The difference between timesharing and keypunch ... amazing. The editor I used back then was QED - which is much the same as ex. I think someone at KU - University of Kansas - had a connection with MIT, because I can recall using Emacs in 1979-1080 or so. And we had close ties to Bell Labs, so my first exposure to C was in about 1978 - there was a precursor language called "B"
Apple has always been big on HCI, which means they did a much better job of engineering and designing their software. The trouble with UNIX was that it was proprietary and expensive, it was an academic computer center kind of thing. That's the problem both Torvalds and Stallman sought to remedy. Mac - up unti Darwin - had always been proprietary, so parts of it were closed off to all but favored developers... So I've got a bit of history, here. Incidentally, the first GUI I used was on a Sun - and that was a beautifully done GUI, I wonder if there is a linux variant with something like that for a WM.
My trouble with the 25GB limit on root is that if you want to install GUIX, and then Emacs, is that you're pretty much done. You won't be able to install Jupyter (for Python) or Haskell, or Rust - and increasing root to a reasonable size is non-trivial. And it seems to me that a minor fix - giving the user the option to get more root space at installation time - would be trivial - "Do you intend to run Jupyter or Emacs? You might want to set the size of root to (say) 100GB..." Do this instead of sticking the user with a full root partition, and then the user has to figure out how to increase the size of root on their own - and my bet is that most people just won't do this, it's easier to go back to their old proprietary systems which work, pretty much. Of course, I've never used Windoze, so I don't know its ins and outs, but if the goal is to make Trisquel commonly accepted and even competition for Windoze and the like, more attention has to be taken to make the user experience as seamless and intuitive (if not more so) than the proprietary systems. That's my point.
Perhaps, but trisquel is based on ubuntu which does go very far in trying to make the user experience easier.
so its possible that there are options, but you either haven't looked them up, or they are a bit beyond your pay-grade so to speak.
I currently use a very odd distro called Hyperbola which would be too daunting for you probably because trisquel is not DIY, Hyperbola is very DIY.
My point though, sometimes solutions exist if you look for them. Guides appear online for various things. Its worth looking into probably. If I had problems like this in my one debian based distro, I would probably know the answer, but as of now, not so much...
Sorry.
In either case, you are at least wise to avoid windows. At this point maybe its become more tainted then its opposition at least on the software end.
(not including google)
Though its still wise to stay away from proprietary operating systems in general due to their built in malware, surveilance and what not.
Finally just gave up on it, and installed Debian 13, which installs just fine on my Kamrui E1 mini pc (after replacing the 256gb SSD which had a windoze install and which prevnted any other OS from being loaded, with a 2TB SSD). Tried to install Guix Home, unfortunately the graphic install didn't work. Trisquel didn't even get to GRUB, it shot craps immediately.
>"I wouldn't recommend Trisquel to anyone, the gang of shmendricks who designed the installer ought to figure out that the root size should be able to be set in the installer - or just set to 200GB, so people can just use it and not screw around with all of this nonsense."
I always just set / to take up the full disk or partition I'm using. EXT4. In the installer. Never even had the slightest problem with partitioning in the installer.
No clue what you are yammering on and on and on about someone somehow forcing you into a / partition size. Patently untrue.