Installing Linus With Separate OS/Data Drives

[Jeff Gaines]

I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
the data. I tried Googling:

"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and can't
believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual booting or
re-writing Grub.

I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.

Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

[Dan Purgert]

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for

Should be a pretty straightforward (albeit 2-step) process from within
the live session (installer). It also depends a little bit on what you
mean by "the data" -- for the rest here, I'm going to assume you mean
"user data" (i.e. home directories).

This is all done in the live session, there may be easier methods.

1. Install everything to the 250G drive, as per "normal" installation.
Do not reboot after the installer completes.
2. Manually format the 1T drive to EXT4 (use gparted).
3. Mount both the newly-installed ("NI") system and "data" drive.
4. Move the directory "NI"/home/username to "data"/username
5. Get the UUID of the "data" drive with lsblk
6. Edit "NI"/etc/fstab to include a mounting point for the data drive:
UUID=xxxxx /home ext4 defaults 0 0
7. Reboot into the newly-installed system

If you mean something else, please can you clarify / explain your
envisioned usage?

[Java Jive]

Post by Dan Purgert

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for

Should be a pretty straightforward (albeit 2-step) process from within
the live session (installer). It also depends a little bit on what you
mean by "the data" -- for the rest here, I'm going to assume you mean
"user data" (i.e. home directories).
This is all done in the live session, there may be easier methods.
1. Install everything to the 250G drive, as per "normal" installation.
Do not reboot after the installer completes.
2. Manually format the 1T drive to EXT4 (use gparted).
3. Mount both the newly-installed ("NI") system and "data" drive.
4. Move the directory "NI"/home/username to "data"/username
5. Get the UUID of the "data" drive with lsblk
UUID=xxxxx /home ext4 defaults 0 0
7. Reboot into the newly-installed system
If you mean something else, please can you clarify / explain your
envisioned usage?

From memory, the above is more complex than it need be. IIRC Mint and
Ubuntu are similar, the latter being my current favourite distro ...

First a note to the OP, 250GB is way more than you need for an OS,
particularly Linux. Of course the disk space required will depend on
how much software you want to install, but as a guide:

Windows 7 through 10 64-bit with LOTS of software installed, but search
indexing, which consumes disk space like there's no tomorrow, disabled,
hibernation and paging (large files) enabled, 64GB is comfortably enough
for me, though occasional housekeeping is beneficial. This is double
what I found necessary for XP 32-bit with probably even more software
installed.

Linux Ubuntu 22 with a moderate amount of software installed and a
swapfile rather than a swap partition, 32GB is plenty for my needs.

As for how to install as you suggest, my instructions are more detailed
about the partitioning part of the installation. By default, Linux will
install to a single partition, but on the Debian line of distros, which
I think includes Mint, there is a particular stage in the process you
need to get right. I'm working from an XUbuntu 22 USB stick, but from
memory Mint is very similar ...

1) Boot from the USB and choose Install, though you can choose Try and
later Install from the Desktop icon.

2) Set the region/language

3) Make your own choices regarding installation size, downloading
updates for the installation, and 3rd party software. I tend to select
the latter as I've found sometimes that certain media files won't play.

CRITICAL SECTION!

4) Dialog entitled 'Installation Type', this is where you choose to let
Linux make all the decisions, or take control, and you need to do the
latter.

You must choose 'Something else'. A gparted-style partitioning window
appears. Select the disk and partition for the root installation, and
click 'Change' underneath the table, and you get to a dialogue entitled
'Edit the partition'. Change 'Use as' to ext4, optionally choose to
format the partition if it contains unwanted old files, and choose '/'
as the 'Mount point'. Click OK.

It's possible that at this point a confirmation dialog may come up:
'Write the previous changes to the disk and continue?', if so, not yet,
choose 'Go back'

Repeat the above for the data or home partition, but this time choosing
'/home' as the 'Mount point'. If already you have data on it, then you
will most probably want to choose NOT to format it, though be aware that
if, later in the installation, you choose a pre-existing username, that
user profile may get overwritten with possible loss of pre-existing data.

If the 'Write the previous changes ...' appears now, choose 'Continue',
otherwise choose Install under the partition table and it will then appear.

END OF CRITICAL SECTION!

5) From now on install as normal, the next stage is choosing the Time Zone.

[Dan Purgert]

Post by Java Jive

Post by Dan Purgert

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for

Should be a pretty straightforward (albeit 2-step) process from within
the live session (installer). It also depends a little bit on what you
mean by "the data" -- for the rest here, I'm going to assume you mean
"user data" (i.e. home directories).
This is all done in the live session, there may be easier methods.
1. Install everything to the 250G drive, as per "normal" installation.
Do not reboot after the installer completes.
2. Manually format the 1T drive to EXT4 (use gparted).
3. Mount both the newly-installed ("NI") system and "data" drive.
4. Move the directory "NI"/home/username to "data"/username
5. Get the UUID of the "data" drive with lsblk
UUID=xxxxx /home ext4 defaults 0 0
7. Reboot into the newly-installed system
If you mean something else, please can you clarify / explain your
envisioned usage?

From memory, the above is more complex than it need be. IIRC Mint and
Ubuntu are similar, the latter being my current favourite distro ...

Yeah, my PC throws a fit for some reason when I don't let linux
partition the main drive --- I think it's some weirdness of the poor
implementation of UEFI on the motherboard.

[Java Jive]

Post by Java Jive
First a note to the OP, 250GB is way more than you need for an OS,
particularly Linux.  Of course the disk space required will depend on

The above is still true, but read on ...

Post by Java Jive
Windows 7 through 10 64-bit with LOTS of software installed, but search
indexing, which consumes disk space like there's no tomorrow, disabled,
hibernation and paging (large files) enabled, 64GB is comfortably enough
for me, though occasional housekeeping is beneficial.

Although I have 21.7GB free on a Windows OS partition, I've just found a
situation where I may have to enlarge it. A few days ago I increased
the RAM on one of my principal PCs from 16GB to 32GB, and late yesterday
evening I noticed that hibernation is now disabled. When I try to
re-enable it using ...

powercfg.exe /hibernate on

... I get ...

error 0xc000007f

Although I've not yet succeeded in fixing the problem, I'm working on
the assumption that the doubling of memory requires a corresponding
increase in hibernation file size, and that there isn't room for it,
hence the error. Having only yesterday given a figure for a Windows
system partition which then I deemed should be adequate, I thought I
ought to correct my previous statement.

Post by Java Jive
This is double
what I found necessary for XP 32-bit with probably even more software
installed.
Linux Ubuntu 22 with a moderate amount of software installed and a
swapfile rather than a swap partition, 32GB is plenty for my needs.

[Paul]

Post by Java Jive
The above is still true, but read on ...

Windows 7 through 10 64-bit with LOTS of software installed, but search indexing, which consumes disk space like there's no tomorrow, disabled, hibernation and paging (large files) enabled, 64GB is comfortably enough for me, though occasional housekeeping is beneficial.

Although I have 21.7GB free on a Windows OS partition, I've just found a situation where I may have to enlarge it.  A few days ago I increased the RAM on one of my principal PCs from 16GB to 32GB, and late yesterday evening I noticed that hibernation is now disabled.  When I try to re-enable it using ...
    powercfg.exe /hibernate on
... I get ...
    error 0xc000007f
Although I've not yet succeeded in fixing the problem, I'm working on the assumption that the doubling of memory requires a corresponding increase in hibernation file size, and that there isn't room for it, hence the error.  Having only yesterday given a figure for a Windows system partition which then I deemed should be adequate, I thought I ought to correct my previous statement.

This is double what I found necessary for XP 32-bit with probably even more software installed.
Linux Ubuntu 22 with a moderate amount of software installed and a swapfile rather than a swap partition, 32GB is plenty for my needs.

I don't bother with hibernate, especially with SSD drives and large RAM onboard.
I think the hibernate still works on my laptop (small RAM).

Hibernate on Windows, uses compression. The hiberfil.sys can be set to 50% of RAM,
and it will still accept that. However, if it attempts to hibernate, and it
really really needs to write out all the RAM, the compression may not be sufficient
to complete the operation, and it will then back out. And that's not desirable
on a laptop, as sometimes it is hibernating because the battery is flat.

Hibernate, records "occupied RAM". When a computer is idle, the idle RAM consumption
can be small, and the length of writes to the hiberfile can be short. It can still
be compressed. As a result, each hibernate might only burn up 1GB of wear life on the SSD.
Only if you're doing a VHDL chip simulation, might you fill the entire RAM, and
have a compression failure on a hibernation attempt :-) It does not normally need
very much of the hiberfile.

But it is still fairly conservative about what settings it will accept,
even if the statistical reality is not remotely similar.

The hiberfile, per session, needs at least the header to be overwritten,
to invalidate it. When you request hibernation, it writes a valid header,
and depending on how many applications are loaded, the footprint might be
reasonably small. If Firefox has gobs of tabs and gigabytes per tab, then
it's not going to end well for you. With conventional hard drives, it
can take *eight minutes* to finish hibernation in pathological cases.

*******

It pays to understand what the dual purposes of the files are, whether
you're on Linux or Windows. Some "dumping" type activities, rely on a
certain file for their dump, and then the file must be sized for the
entire RAM (plus a little). You might make such an allocation, and
never really use it.

SSDs are getting bigger, so making the files full size is now possible.
But the SSDs also aren't getting cheaper. They're about double the
price of last fall, for some models. Which is an impediment to acquiring SSDs
right now. I don't expect it to get any better (like, after an earthquake
near the fab).

Paul

[Java Jive]

Post by Paul

Post by Java Jive

Windows 7 through 10 64-bit with LOTS of software installed, but search indexing, which consumes disk space like there's no tomorrow, disabled, hibernation and paging (large files) enabled, 64GB is comfortably enough for me, though occasional housekeeping is beneficial.

Although I have 21.7GB free on a Windows OS partition, I've just found a situation where I may have to enlarge it.  A few days ago I increased the RAM on one of my principal PCs from 16GB to 32GB, and late yesterday evening I noticed that hibernation is now disabled.  When I try to re-enable it using ...
    powercfg.exe /hibernate on
... I get ...
    error 0xc000007f
Although I've not yet succeeded in fixing the problem, I'm working on the assumption that the doubling of memory requires a corresponding increase in hibernation file size, and that there isn't room for it, hence the error.  Having only yesterday given a figure for a Windows system partition which then I deemed should be adequate, I thought I ought to correct my previous statement.

I don't bother with hibernate, especially with SSD drives and large RAM onboard.
I think the hibernate still works on my laptop (small RAM).
Hibernate on Windows, uses compression. The hiberfil.sys can be set to 50% of RAM,
and it will still accept that. However, if it attempts to hibernate, and it
really really needs to write out all the RAM, the compression may not be sufficient
to complete the operation, and it will then back out. And that's not desirable
on a laptop, as sometimes it is hibernating because the battery is flat.
Hibernate, records "occupied RAM". When a computer is idle, the idle RAM consumption
can be small, and the length of writes to the hiberfile can be short. It can still
be compressed. As a result, each hibernate might only burn up 1GB of wear life on the SSD.
Only if you're doing a VHDL chip simulation, might you fill the entire RAM, and
have a compression failure on a hibernation attempt :-) It does not normally need
very much of the hiberfile.
But it is still fairly conservative about what settings it will accept,
even if the statistical reality is not remotely similar.
The hiberfile, per session, needs at least the header to be overwritten,
to invalidate it. When you request hibernation, it writes a valid header,
and depending on how many applications are loaded, the footprint might be
reasonably small. If Firefox has gobs of tabs and gigabytes per tab, then
it's not going to end well for you. With conventional hard drives, it
can take *eight minutes* to finish hibernation in pathological cases.
*******
It pays to understand what the dual purposes of the files are, whether
you're on Linux or Windows. Some "dumping" type activities, rely on a
certain file for their dump, and then the file must be sized for the
entire RAM (plus a little). You might make such an allocation, and
never really use it.
SSDs are getting bigger, so making the files full size is now possible.
But the SSDs also aren't getting cheaper. They're about double the
price of last fall, for some models. Which is an impediment to acquiring SSDs
right now. I don't expect it to get any better (like, after an earthquake
near the fab).

As always, thanks for your helpful comments, Paul.

[Java Jive]

Post by Java Jive

Post by Java Jive
First a note to the OP, 250GB is way more than you need for an OS,
particularly Linux.  Of course the disk space required will depend on

The above is still true, but read on ...

Post by Java Jive
Windows 7 through 10 64-bit with LOTS of software installed, but
search indexing, which consumes disk space like there's no tomorrow,
disabled, hibernation and paging (large files) enabled, 64GB is
comfortably enough for me, though occasional housekeeping is beneficial.

Although I have 21.7GB free on a Windows OS partition, I've just found a
situation where I may have to enlarge it.  A few days ago I increased
the RAM on one of my principal PCs from 16GB to 32GB, and late yesterday
evening I noticed that hibernation is now disabled.  When I try to
re-enable it using ...
    powercfg.exe /hibernate on
.... I get ...
    error 0xc000007f
Although I've not yet succeeded in fixing the problem, I'm working on
the assumption that the doubling of memory requires a corresponding
increase in hibernation file size, and that there isn't room for it,
hence the error.  Having only yesterday given a figure for a Windows
system partition which then I deemed should be adequate, I thought I
ought to correct my previous statement.

I've now been able to increase the size of this partition to 80GB, and
immediately was able to enable hibernation, so, as I suspected, the
reason for the error 0xc000007f was insufficient disk space for the
hibernation file, hiberfil.sys, which now consumes 31.9GB.

[bad sector]

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and
can't believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual
booting or re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

The 'data' can be anywhere including 'home'
directories and including mere links for them
such as /home/UserYou pointing to /somefolder
somewhere on some disk partition. AND you can
set 'homes' up on both the native partition
hosting the OS and elsewhere and alternate
between the two residences IF you want redundancy.

First keep things simple and just install normally
on one partition, you CAN do mods later. On 250gb
you can even install 5 distros on that many
partitions all using the same data but that would
be for later to fight boredom :-)

[Paul]

"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and can't believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual booting or re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

Boot the media in UEFI mode, as the install gets a bit annoyed
in legacy mode. You could do legacy (MSDOS) mode but it might
take a couple tries.

The partitioner appears, when you select "Do Something Else". You
don't want a default setup. Then you just dial in a EFI partition,
a swap partition, a slash partition on /dev/sda, and the home partition
on /dev/sdb. It can all be done from the partitioner.

[Picture]

Loading Image...

Paul

[J.O. Aho]

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
the data.

First you need to define what is "data" for you, is it the porn movies
(don't take it too literally) you download or is it the extra
applications you install.

Applications that are installed tend to be spread all over the storage,
for example libraries (like dll in microsoft windows) are placed in /lib
/lib64 /usr/lib /usr/lib64 /usr/share /bin /sbin /usr/bin /usr/sbin /opt
and a quite many other places.

Sure all your user data is stored in your home directory and if you have
more than one user you could then create a new mount point at /home,
assign the 1TB SSD to it. This is quite simple to do when you install
your Linux, just take advanced option on the partitioning of the ssd and
add the other as /home.

See https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=345646

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <***@mid.individual.net>,
J.O. Aho <***@example.net> wrote:
...

Post by J.O. Aho
Applications that are installed tend to be spread all over the storage,
for example libraries (like dll in microsoft windows) are placed in /lib

====================================^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ?

What is the z/OS equivalent?

[J.O. Aho]

Post by Kenny McCormack
...

Post by J.O. Aho
Applications that are installed tend to be spread all over the storage,
for example libraries (like dll in microsoft windows) are placed in /lib

====================================^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ?
What is the z/OS equivalent?

z/OS still a UNIX, so the same as for all other UNIX and Unix clones.

[Lew Pitcher]

Post by J.O. Aho

Post by Kenny McCormack
...

Post by J.O. Aho
Applications that are installed tend to be spread all over the storage,
for example libraries (like dll in microsoft windows) are placed in /lib

====================================^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ?
What is the z/OS equivalent?

z/OS still a UNIX, so the same as for all other UNIX and Unix clones.

On the non-unix side of z/OS (is that side still called MVS?), dynamic
load modules are called DLLs as well. However, the non-unix side does
not dictate where these reside, so (for the most part, excluding some
system and utility DLLs) DLLs are scattered among various disparate
(and application dependant) PDSE datasets.

[Carlos E.R.]

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and
can't believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual
booting or re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

Depends on what you understand by "data". If you mean your user files,
then you only need to put the "/home" directory in the second disk. As
simple as that. No guide necessary.

Or it may mean put "/data" directory on second disk. Another interpretation.

Now, how to achieve this, it depends on what you have already done. To
do it from scratch during installation, well, the details depend on what
distribution you are using.

For example, on openSUSE you tell the partitioner to do an offering
using the small disk, then modify it to put /home in the other disk.

[Paul]

"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and can't believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual booting or re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

Depends on what you understand by "data". If you mean your user files, then you only need to put the "/home" directory in the second disk. As simple as that. No guide necessary.
Or it may mean put "/data" directory on second disk. Another interpretation.
Now, how to achieve this, it depends on what you have already done. To do it from scratch during installation, well, the details depend on what distribution you are using.
For example, on openSUSE you tell the partitioner to do an offering using the small disk, then modify it to put /home in the other disk.

You can do it all with custom partitioning.

It's actually pretty easy, all things considered.

Boot the media in UEFI mode, rather than CSM.
Partition the disks GPT. Use the partitioner
and add enough partitione. EFI, swap, slash, home.
Four partitions. And *only* put an EFI on the
OS/boot disk, not on both disk drives.

Paul

[David W. Hodgins]

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and can't
believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual booting or
re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

It isn't hard. The critical part has nothing to do with the operating system.

Which drive the bios or uefi firmware will look for the os in depends on the
bios or uefi configuration settings.

Whether it's the bios firmware looking for the boot drive, or the uefi
firmware looking for the efi system partition, where it looks is controlled
by the settings.

I would install the os with just the one drive connected. Power off, connect
the second drive, power on/boot. If it doesn't boot, power off and swap the
data cables between the two drives.

Once it's working, create a data partition on the spinning rust drives, mount
it, and as root move the directories you want on the rust drive to it, replacing
them with symlinks. Just be careful to keep the ownership and permissions the
same when moving them.

You can move just the directories that for things like Downloads, or you can
move all of /home, as you prefer.

I move individual directories, so I end up with
$ ls -ld Downloads
lrwxrwxrwx 1 dave dave 14 Dec 22 11:15 Downloads -> /s3/Downloads//

With /s3 being the directory used as a mount point for one of the partitions on
the spinning rust drive.

$ ls -l /s3|grep Downloads
drwxr-xr-x 52 dave dave 20480 May 1 17:20 Downloads/

Be careful of not to try to move something that is in use. If you want to move
all of /home, boot from another os, such as using a live iso on a usb drive.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

[Paul]

Post by David W. Hodgins

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and can't
believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual booting or
re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

It isn't hard. The critical part has nothing to do with the operating system.
Which drive the bios or uefi firmware will look for the os in depends on the
bios or uefi configuration settings.
Whether it's the bios firmware looking for the boot drive, or the uefi
firmware looking for the efi system partition, where it looks is controlled
by the settings.
I would install the os with just the one drive connected. Power off, connect
the second drive, power on/boot. If it doesn't boot, power off and swap the
data cables between the two drives.
Once it's working, create a data partition on the spinning rust drives, mount
it, and as root move the directories you want on the rust drive to it, replacing
them with symlinks. Just be careful to keep the ownership and permissions the
same when moving them.
You can move just the directories that for things like Downloads, or you can
move all of /home, as you prefer.
I move individual directories, so I end up with
$ ls -ld Downloads
lrwxrwxrwx 1 dave dave 14 Dec 22 11:15 Downloads -> /s3/Downloads//
With /s3 being the directory used as a mount point for one of the partitions on
the spinning rust drive.
$ ls -l /s3|grep Downloads
drwxr-xr-x  52 dave dave      20480 May  1 17:20 Downloads/
Be careful of not to try to move something that is in use. If you want to move
all of /home, boot from another os, such as using a live iso on a usb drive.
Regards, Dave Hodgins

I already tested it in a VM, and you can install with two blank disk drives present.

The mistake I keep making, is forgetting to put the EFI partition. The
partitioner even reminds you of missing items. There are some things
though, that are optional (like /home), and it's simply going to
assume / is used for everything, if you neglect to define a /home.
If you define a /home, it's smart enough to mount /home on / .

Paul

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2024-05-13 16:39, David W. Hodgins wrote:

...

Post by David W. Hodgins
Be careful of not to try to move something that is in use. If you want to move
all of /home, boot from another os, such as using a live iso on a usb drive.

Or just login as root in text mode.

[Paul]

Post by Carlos E.R.
...

Post by David W. Hodgins
Be careful of not to try to move something that is in use. If you want to move
all of /home, boot from another os, such as using a live iso on a usb drive.

Or just login as root in text mode.

A live ISO is easier to arrange. Having it on a
USB stick, loads faster. I have one USB stick
I use all the time, for this sort of stuff.

Paul

[Carlos E.R.]

Post by Paul

Post by Carlos E.R.
...

Post by David W. Hodgins
Be careful of not to try to move something that is in use. If you want to move
all of /home, boot from another os, such as using a live iso on a usb drive.

Or just login as root in text mode.

A live ISO is easier to arrange. Having it on a
USB stick, loads faster. I have one USB stick
I use all the time, for this sort of stuff.

To me, it is way faster not to reboot.

In some machines the live USB stick takes 5 minutes to boot.

[Paul]

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by Paul

Post by Carlos E.R.
...

Post by David W. Hodgins
Be careful of not to try to move something that is in use. If you want to move
all of /home, boot from another os, such as using a live iso on a usb drive.

Or just login as root in text mode.

A live ISO is easier to arrange. Having it on a
USB stick, loads faster. I have one USB stick
I use all the time, for this sort of stuff.

To me, it is way faster not to reboot.
In some machines the live USB stick takes 5 minutes to boot.

Mine is maybe 15-20 seconds. Some of the Linux Mint have been pretty fast.
But there is also quite a wide variation, from one release to another.
Once you get a fast one, you keep using it :-)

Something like Ubuntu, that insists on checksumming all the files,
that just can't end well.

Paul

[David W. Hodgins]

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by Paul

Post by Carlos E.R.
...

Post by David W. Hodgins
Be careful of not to try to move something that is in use. If you want to move
all of /home, boot from another os, such as using a live iso on a usb drive.

Or just login as root in text mode.

A live ISO is easier to arrange. Having it on a
USB stick, loads faster. I have one USB stick
I use all the time, for this sort of stuff.

To me, it is way faster not to reboot.
In some machines the live USB stick takes 5 minutes to boot.

In Mageia, "telinit 3" still works. Does it still work in other systemd using
distributions?

I normally use "telinit 1" before running my backups, and then reboot after
running them. systemd-journal is still running, but with nothing else running,
nothing is being written.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

[Carlos E.R.]

On Tue, 14 May 2024 09:18:42 -0400, Carlos E.R.

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by Paul

Post by Carlos E.R.
...

Post by David W. Hodgins
Be careful of not to try to move something that is in use. If you want to move
all of /home, boot from another os, such as using a live iso on a usb drive.

Or just login as root in text mode.

A live ISO is easier to arrange. Having it on a
USB stick, loads faster. I have one USB stick
I use all the time, for this sort of stuff.

To me, it is way faster not to reboot.
In some machines the live USB stick takes 5 minutes to boot.

In Mageia, "telinit 3" still works. Does it still work in other systemd
using distributions?

"init 3" does certainly works in openSUSE Leap. "telininit" I do not
know, I do not use it.

I normally use "telinit 1" before running my backups, and then reboot after
running them. systemd-journal is still running, but with nothing else running,
nothing is being written.
Regards, Dave Hodgins

[Jasen Betts]

Post by Paul

Post by Carlos E.R.
...

Post by David W. Hodgins
Be careful of not to try to move something that is in use. If you want to move
all of /home, boot from another os, such as using a live iso on a usb drive.

Or just login as root in text mode.

A live ISO is easier to arrange. Having it on a
USB stick, loads faster. I have one USB stick
I use all the time, for this sort of stuff.

Generally I find not rebooting to be faster than rebooting, but you do
you.

[Jasen Betts]

Post by David W. Hodgins

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and can't
believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual booting or
re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

It isn't hard. The critical part has nothing to do with the operating system.
Which drive the bios or uefi firmware will look for the os in depends on the
bios or uefi configuration settings.
Whether it's the bios firmware looking for the boot drive, or the uefi
firmware looking for the efi system partition, where it looks is controlled
by the settings.
I would install the os with just the one drive connected. Power off, connect
the second drive, power on/boot. If it doesn't boot, power off and swap the
data cables between the two drives.
Once it's working, create a data partition on the spinning rust drives, mount
it, and as root move the directories you want on the rust drive to it, replacing
them with symlinks. Just be careful to keep the ownership and permissions the
same when moving them.
You can move just the directories that for things like Downloads, or you can
move all of /home, as you prefer.
I move individual directories, so I end up with
$ ls -ld Downloads
lrwxrwxrwx 1 dave dave 14 Dec 22 11:15 Downloads -> /s3/Downloads//
With /s3 being the directory used as a mount point for one of the partitions on
the spinning rust drive.
$ ls -l /s3|grep Downloads
drwxr-xr-x 52 dave dave 20480 May 1 17:20 Downloads/
Be careful of not to try to move something that is in use. If you want to move
all of /home, boot from another os, such as using a live iso on a usb drive.

Or just log all the users out and log in as root (may need to set create a
root password by doing "sudo passwwd" first.)

[David W. Hodgins]

<snip>

Post by Jasen Betts

Post by David W. Hodgins
Be careful of not to try to move something that is in use. If you want to move
all of /home, boot from another os, such as using a live iso on a usb drive.

Or just log all the users out and log in as root (may need to set create a
root password by doing "sudo passwwd" first.)

Just logging out may leave some things running as the user who logged out.

After logging in as root, I use htop and sort the tasks by user, then kill any
remaining tasks left over for the user.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

[Jeff Gaines]

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and can't
believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual booting or
re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

Many thanks for all the replies :-)

I confirm I want to set it up with 1 x OS drive and a separate drive for
my data, e.g. documents, pictures etc. I just found it easier in Windows
to back up the data drive and, in the event of a problem just re-install
Windows and the data was still there.

It's a 250 GB SSD because I'm not sure anything smaller is available
nowadays!

I hope the new (to me) machine will arrive tomorrow and will have the
replies next to me while I install. I will let you know how it went...

[candycanearter07]

Post by Jeff Gaines

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and can't
believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual booting or
re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

Many thanks for all the replies :-)
I confirm I want to set it up with 1 x OS drive and a separate drive for
my data, e.g. documents, pictures etc. I just found it easier in Windows
to back up the data drive and, in the event of a problem just re-install
Windows and the data was still there.
It's a 250 GB SSD because I'm not sure anything smaller is available
nowadays!
I hope the new (to me) machine will arrive tomorrow and will have the
replies next to me while I install. I will let you know how it went...

Well, that would be even easier to set up if its two separate drives.
Just make a mount point somewhere (maybe in /media) and edit the fstab
file accordingly.

[J.O. Aho]

Post by candycanearter07

Post by Jeff Gaines

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and can't
believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual booting or
re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

Many thanks for all the replies :-)
I confirm I want to set it up with 1 x OS drive and a separate drive for
my data, e.g. documents, pictures etc. I just found it easier in Windows
to back up the data drive and, in the event of a problem just re-install
Windows and the data was still there.
It's a 250 GB SSD because I'm not sure anything smaller is available
nowadays!
I hope the new (to me) machine will arrive tomorrow and will have the
replies next to me while I install. I will let you know how it went...

Well, that would be even easier to set up if its two separate drives.
Just make a mount point somewhere (maybe in /media) and edit the fstab
file accordingly.

and then bind mount the /media/something to /home ?
far easier and more logical to just mount the second drive as /home.

[candycanearter07]

Post by J.O. Aho

Post by candycanearter07

Post by Jeff Gaines

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and can't
believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual booting or
re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

Many thanks for all the replies :-)
I confirm I want to set it up with 1 x OS drive and a separate drive for
my data, e.g. documents, pictures etc. I just found it easier in Windows
to back up the data drive and, in the event of a problem just re-install
Windows and the data was still there.
It's a 250 GB SSD because I'm not sure anything smaller is available
nowadays!
I hope the new (to me) machine will arrive tomorrow and will have the
replies next to me while I install. I will let you know how it went...

Well, that would be even easier to set up if its two separate drives.
Just make a mount point somewhere (maybe in /media) and edit the fstab
file accordingly.

and then bind mount the /media/something to /home ?
far easier and more logical to just mount the second drive as /home.

Oh, oops.. I wasn't sure if they wanted a pure data drive or just a
separated home partition.

[Jasen Betts]

Post by candycanearter07
Well, that would be even easier to set up if its two separate drives.
Just make a mount point somewhere (maybe in /media) and edit the fstab
file accordingly.

/media is mainly for removable media

[Paul]

Post by Jasen Betts

Post by candycanearter07
Well, that would be even easier to set up if its two separate drives.
Just make a mount point somewhere (maybe in /media) and edit the fstab
file accordingly.

/media is mainly for removable media

It's true you can make mount points anywhere, but generally
mixing home brew mounts with an automounter spot (/media) isn't considered
to be "good bookkeeping".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard

/mnt is what I use occasionally while working on something.
And you could make structure under there.

You can see them use /mnt here for sundry purposes.

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Chroot

Paul

[bad sector]

Post by Jeff Gaines

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and
can't believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual
booting or re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

Many thanks for all the replies :-)
I confirm I want to set it up with 1 x OS drive and a separate drive for
my data, e.g. documents, pictures etc. I just found it easier in Windows
to back up the data drive and, in the event of a problem just re-install
Windows and the data was still there.
It's a 250 GB SSD because I'm not sure anything smaller is available
nowadays!
I hope the new (to me) machine will arrive tomorrow and will have the
replies next to me while I install. I will let you know how it went...

Installation and booting being two phases where you want to keep it AS
SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE, install to your SSD and create a home on it as you
will be prompted to do during the installation ritual. Them come back
here with what you have done and you'll get more applicable and specific
advice to go further :-)

[Paul]

Installation and booting being two phases where you want to keep it AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE, install to your SSD and create a home on it as you will be prompted to do during the installation ritual. Them come back here with what you have done and you'll get more applicable and specific advice to go further :-)

But you can do everything needed, right from the partitioner
in that installer. It's really no sweat.

[Picture]

https://i.postimg.cc/1XpY0SnH/XFCE213-two-disk.gif

You can go out of your way, to antagonize the partitioner.
For example, with two disk drives, you could put an EFI
on both drives. That destroys the simplicity of this setup.
As long as one drive is relatively unsophisticated in
setup (is "just a data drive"), the install should
go smoothly on the "OS drive".

Paul

[bad sector]

Post by Paul

Installation and booting being two phases where you want to keep it AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE, install to your SSD and create a home on it as you will be prompted to do during the installation ritual. Them come back here with what you have done and you'll get more applicable and specific advice to go further :-)

But you can do everything needed, right from the partitioner
in that installer. It's really no sweat.
[Picture]
https://i.postimg.cc/1XpY0SnH/XFCE213-two-disk.gif
You can go out of your way, to antagonize the partitioner.
For example, with two disk drives, you could put an EFI
on both drives. That destroys the simplicity of this setup.
As long as one drive is relatively unsophisticated in
setup (is "just a data drive"), the install should
go smoothly on the "OS drive".
Paul

I like to keep in mind that the user could well be unfamiliar enough
with linux. Say you start with two drives, the data drive gets written
into /etc/fstab but on the next boot for some reason like that data
drive being unplugged or just throwing a fit with /etc/fstab not written
with 'nofail' etc. etc. etc. and you there have a failed boot on your
*very first install*, and it's curtains for linux. Neither windows nor
linux installers are anywhere near ready for prime-time but windows at
least wouldn't give you that many real option anyway. What if I want to
create precisely sized and located partitions? Possible with fdisk or
gdisk but more after some familiarity is acquired than at ab-initio
levels. Installing more or less windowsish on one drive to begin with
gives the novice a nice opportunity to see how it is done in
Defaultistan and soon after how EASY it is to change everything to the
way you want it done. My 2 cents.

Actually I would even suggest to first partition the SSD because 250 gb
is really wasted one just one OS but there again I refrained from such a
suggestion because it complicates the KISS and can be done later anyway.
Right now I don't know exactly what disks or what OS or what box is at
play so just a plain-jane install is what I would promote initially.

[Paul]

Post by Paul

Installation and booting being two phases where you want to keep it AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE, install to your SSD and create a home on it as you will be prompted to do during the installation ritual. Them come back here with what you have done and you'll get more applicable and specific advice to go further :-)

But you can do everything needed, right from the partitioner
in that installer. It's really no sweat.
    [Picture]
     https://i.postimg.cc/1XpY0SnH/XFCE213-two-disk.gif
You can go out of your way, to antagonize the partitioner.
For example, with two disk drives, you could put an EFI
on both drives. That destroys the simplicity of this setup.
As long as one drive is relatively unsophisticated in
setup (is "just a data drive"), the install should
go smoothly on the "OS drive".
    Paul

I like to keep in mind that the user could well be unfamiliar enough with linux. Say you start with two drives, the data drive gets written into /etc/fstab but on the next boot for some reason like that data drive being unplugged or just throwing a fit with /etc/fstab not written with 'nofail' etc. etc. etc. and you there have a failed boot on your *very first install*, and it's curtains for linux. Neither windows nor linux installers are anywhere near ready for prime-time but windows at least wouldn't give you that many real option anyway. What if I want to create precisely sized and located partitions? Possible with fdisk or gdisk but more after some familiarity is acquired than at ab-initio levels.  Installing more or less windowsish on one drive to begin with gives the novice a nice opportunity to see how it is done in Defaultistan and soon after how EASY it is to change everything to the way you want it done. My 2 cents.
Actually I would even suggest to first partition the SSD because 250 gb is really wasted one just one OS but there again I refrained from such a suggestion because it complicates the KISS and can be done later anyway. Right now I don't know exactly what disks or what OS or what box is at play so just a plain-jane install is what I would promote initially.

I was trying to come up with a way that did not
involve fiddling with blkid. And it's pretty
straight forward.

Because the partitioner gives you feedback, you're
unlikely to forget your EFI partition. If you forget
swap, you end up with a /swapfile.

Certainly if a user is more happy to use one
drive and keep all materials on one drive, that
follows one of the prime directives of "keeping
all the goods on one drive". But if a person
who has already done a Linux install, tells me
they want their home on a separate drive,
then I'm willing to believe they have some idea
what/why they're doing that.

This is just slightly better than doing the
initial install on one drive, and then screwing
around with moving it. Yes, moving it around
can be easy -- or, it could involve a broken BLKID
and a learning experience. I would give it a
try with GParted.

I hardly ever accept the default install, because
it's been weird over the years. (Like on an
MSDOS legacy setup, the 1,2,5 thing. Invoking
Extended/Logical as a punishment of naive users.
I always steer that manually. Extended in 2,
logical in 5, just makes a mess.) I've had some
drives here, where making changes to a relatively
large drive with Extended/Logical, takes me half
a day.

Paul

[J.O. Aho]

Post by bad sector

Post by Paul

Post by bad sector
Installation and booting being two phases where you want to keep it
AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE, install to your SSD and create a home on it as
you will be prompted to do during the installation ritual. Them come
back here with what you have done and you'll get more applicable and
specific advice to go further :-)

But you can do everything needed, right from the partitioner
in that installer. It's really no sweat.
    [Picture]
     https://i.postimg.cc/1XpY0SnH/XFCE213-two-disk.gif
You can go out of your way, to antagonize the partitioner.
For example, with two disk drives, you could put an EFI
on both drives. That destroys the simplicity of this setup.
As long as one drive is relatively unsophisticated in
setup (is "just a data drive"), the install should
go smoothly on the "OS drive".
    Paul

I like to keep in mind that the user could well be unfamiliar enough
with linux. Say you start with two drives, the data drive gets written
into /etc/fstab but on the next boot for some reason like that data
drive being unplugged or just throwing a fit with /etc/fstab not written
with 'nofail' etc. etc. etc. and you there have a failed boot on your
*very first install*

That isn't the fault of fstab but systemd and it's way of mount things
if you get a failed boot just for a secondary drive is missing. If you
have a systemd free Linux, it will bot up fine, you can even login with
the user, but of course you won't end up in your ~/ as it don't exist
and you have nowhere to save your files either, so things will not be
fully functional for the users until you have fixed the issue.

Post by bad sector
Actually I would even suggest to first partition the SSD because 250 gb
is really wasted one just one OS but there again I refrained from such a
suggestion because it complicates the KISS and can be done later anyway.
Right now I don't know exactly what disks or what OS or what box is at
play so just a plain-jane install is what I would promote initially.

250 GB is quite cramped IMHO, even 500GB feels cramped and I favor 1TB+
SSD as they also tend to be faster than the tiny ones.

[bad💽sector]

Post by J.O. Aho

Post by bad sector

Post by Paul

Post by bad sector
Installation and booting being two phases where you want to keep it
AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE, install to your SSD and create a home on it
as you will be prompted to do during the installation ritual. Them
come back here with what you have done and you'll get more
applicable and specific advice to go further :-)

But you can do everything needed, right from the partitioner
in that installer. It's really no sweat.
    [Picture]
     https://i.postimg.cc/1XpY0SnH/XFCE213-two-disk.gif
You can go out of your way, to antagonize the partitioner.
For example, with two disk drives, you could put an EFI
on both drives. That destroys the simplicity of this setup.
As long as one drive is relatively unsophisticated in
setup (is "just a data drive"), the install should
go smoothly on the "OS drive".
    Paul

I like to keep in mind that the user could well be unfamiliar enough
with linux. Say you start with two drives, the data drive gets written
into /etc/fstab but on the next boot for some reason like that data
drive being unplugged or just throwing a fit with /etc/fstab not
written with 'nofail' etc. etc. etc. and you there have a failed boot
on your *very first install*

That isn't the fault of fstab but systemd and it's way of mount things
if you get a failed boot just for a secondary drive is missing. If you
have a systemd free Linux, it will bot up fine, you can even login with
the user, but of course you won't end up in your ~/ as it don't exist
and you have nowhere to save your files either, so things will not be
fully functional for the users until you have fixed the issue.

Thanks, I didn't know that. I've reduced the distros in my stable from 7
to 5 and now have only 1 with systemd :-)

Artix, Devuan, Slackware, Tumbleweed, VoidLinux, one for every weekday.

Post by J.O. Aho

Post by bad sector
Actually I would even suggest to first partition the SSD because 250
gb is really wasted one just one OS but there again I refrained from
such a suggestion because it complicates the KISS and can be done
later anyway. Right now I don't know exactly what disks or what OS or
what box is at play so just a plain-jane install is what I would
promote initially.

250 GB is quite cramped IMHO, even 500GB feels cramped and I favor 1TB+
SSD as they also tend to be faster than the tiny ones.

OK, in that perticular case I was thinking in terms of OS only with
homes and data on another drive. I use mobile rack trays only; all OSes
and 250gb fast data go on 1tb ssd with other data on either 2tb or 4tb
spinner.

[Carlos E.R.]

Post by J.O. Aho

Post by bad sector
I like to keep in mind that the user could well be unfamiliar enough
with linux. Say you start with two drives, the data drive gets written
into /etc/fstab but on the next boot for some reason like that data
drive being unplugged or just throwing a fit with /etc/fstab not
written with 'nofail' etc. etc. etc. and you there have a failed boot
on your *very first install*

That isn't the fault of fstab but systemd and it's way of mount things
if you get a failed boot just for a secondary drive is missing. If you
have a systemd free Linux, it will bot up fine, you can even login with
the user, but of course you won't end up in your ~/ as it don't exist
and you have nowhere to save your files either, so things will not be
fully functional for the users until you have fixed the issue.

Nope.

openSUSE, back at the time when systemd was not a thing, would not boot
if one of the disks was missing. At best, it would boot in rescue mode.

Pretty much the same as today with systemd.

[David W. Hodgins]

Post by Carlos E.R.
openSUSE, back at the time when systemd was not a thing, would not boot
if one of the disks was missing. At best, it would boot in rescue mode.
Pretty much the same as today with systemd.

With systemd, it's easy to fix. Let it know which drives are optional at boot
by adding the option "nofail" to the fstab entries for those drives.

I think it's better to drop to a rescue shell at boot if something critical is
not available rather then having it not mount and possibly having things written
to the underlying file system.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

[Carlos E.R.]

On Tue, 14 May 2024 08:37:36 -0400, Carlos E.R.

Post by Carlos E.R.
openSUSE, back at the time when systemd was not a thing, would not boot
if one of the disks was missing. At best, it would boot in rescue mode.
Pretty much the same as today with systemd.

With systemd, it's easy to fix. Let it know which drives are optional
at boot by adding the option "nofail" to the fstab entries for those
drives.
I think it's better to drop to a rescue shell at boot if something
critical is not available rather then having it not mount and
possibly having things written to the underlying file system.

Absolutely.

To me, not mounting /home is critical.

[bad sector]

On Tue, 14 May 2024 08:37:36 -0400, Carlos E.R.

Post by Carlos E.R.
openSUSE, back at the time when systemd was not a thing, would not boot
if one of the disks was missing. At best, it would boot in rescue mode.
Pretty much the same as today with systemd.

With systemd, it's easy to fix. Let it know which drives are optional at boot
by adding the option "nofail" to the fstab entries for those drives.
I think it's better to drop to a rescue shell at boot if something critical is
not available rather then having it not mount and possibly having things written
to the underlying file system.
Regards, Dave Hodgins

Every case is different, I have fstab mount a data drive hosting MY home
and MY data but with nofail because if that drive is not on-line then I
just log in as another one of my user ids whose home is on the root
drive. Ditto for swap, the boot could fail without 'nofail' which is
rather harsh in my opinion when all you need is an interim swap file
under /. If this is a non issue without systemd that's just great, I
came across it with OpenSuse Tumbleweed which does use it.

[David W. Hodgins]

Post by bad sector
Every case is different, I have fstab mount a data drive hosting MY home
and MY data but with nofail because if that drive is not on-line then I
just log in as another one of my user ids whose home is on the root
drive. Ditto for swap, the boot could fail without 'nofail' which is
rather harsh in my opinion when all you need is an interim swap file
under /. If this is a non issue without systemd that's just great, I
came across it with OpenSuse Tumbleweed which does use it.

Ever encountered a case where someone ran a backup (as root) but didn't notice
that the destination file system had failed to mount?

Regards, Dave Hodgins

[bad sector]

Post by David W. Hodgins

Post by bad sector
Every case is different, I have fstab mount a data drive hosting MY home
and MY data but with nofail because if that drive is not on-line then I
just log in as another one of my user ids whose home is on the root
drive. Ditto for swap, the boot could fail without 'nofail' which is
rather harsh in my opinion when all you need is an interim swap file
under /.  If this is a non issue without systemd that's just great, I
came across it with OpenSuse Tumbleweed which does use it.

Ever encountered a case where someone ran a backup (as root) but didn't notice
that the destination file system had failed to mount?
Regards, Dave Hodgins

More than once, and it wasn't in fstab, "I" forgot to mount it!

[Jeff Gaines]

Post by Jeff Gaines
I hope the new (to me) machine will arrive tomorrow and will have the
replies next to me while I install. I will let you know how it went...

OK, update 1.

My very pretty blonde post lady rang the bell around 11:30 and said "oh,
this is a bit heavy dear, can you manage it". That completely ruined my
day before it had really started, I said yes thank you and waited to cry
until I had closed the door.

Anyway it was my HP MICRO SERVER G7 N54L which is brand new sealed in its
original box even though 12 or 13 years old. 2 GB RAM and a 2.2 GHz AMD
processor. These are really neat units.

Unpacked it, it had the biggest sachet of Silica Gel I have ever seen
inside but it is genuinely brand new and unused.

Decided best to make sure it worked before trying anything fancy so
connected it all up (VGA graphics), plugged in my Ventoy external SSD and
fired it up. No problems except it just didn't want to know the Ventoy. I
tried every configuration under the sun and even though the Ventoy was
recognised in the BIOS it wouldn't boot from it. Decided in the end it
must be because the BIOS is a real BIOS, none of this EFIng nonsense.

Decide to Rufus myself a thumb-drive, Rufus said there's an update so
downloaded it. Would only create NTFS and I'm not sure if that would be
recognised so went back to an older version and used FAT32.

Plugged it in and lo and behold it booted straightaway. I say straightaway
but with 2 GB RAM and the spinning HD that came with it it was a
horrendously slow process. Anyway it got there in the end and I had a play
and all seemed well but slow.

I had 2 x 8GB DDR3 and although the spec says 8 GB max several people have
said it will recognise 16 GB so I had the manual up on my Windows desktop
and followed it to slide the mobo tray out disconnecting all the cables as
I went. Took out the 2 GB RAM stick, put the 2 x 8 in and put it all back
together.

Re-booted and was going through its boot process when "critical error, no
fan" appeared on the screen. Pulled the power and re-checked and I had
left the fan cable out. Fixed that and it re-booted fine and seems to
recognise the full 16 GB of RAM.

So a good start with a fair bit of learning, including how to tell how
much memory it recognised with a command line involving a cat and
systeminfo.

Now I know it works next step will be to stick my DVD drive in (I want to
make isos from DVDs and Linux seems to be much better than Windows), then
I will follow all your input and perhaps later or probably tomorrow I will
set about installing it to a 2 x SSD setup, I have found cradles which
allow fitting 2.5" drives into the 3.5" standard frames.

Onwards and upwards...

[Jeff Gaines]

Post by Jeff Gaines
I hope the new (to me) machine will arrive tomorrow and will have the
replies next to me while I install. I will let you know how it went...

Update 2

Left the machine on overnight and all was well this morning so hopefully I
have struck lucky with the memory.

Added the DVD player this morning. Had to snap off a metal panel that has
been sleeping peacefully for 13 years but no problems. Power was adjacent
but needed to add a data cable, wangle it through the machine and find
"P6" to plug it into. Fortunately the design is such that I could see an
empty SATA socket but I had to slide the mobo out to reach it. Anyway did
that and re-booted and all was well.

Then the biggy. Cleaned the two SSDs off (in Windows, I'm a coward) then
put them in their converter and into slots 1 & 2.

Re-booted fine and chose "something else" as partitioning. Sadly way
beyond my pay grade, I wanted everything except /home (or is it /user) on
the first disk and /home on second. Problem is I do not have sufficient
knowledge to know how much space to give each partition/folder so I went
back and told it to take the whole 250 GB drive.

Once it had installed and I had managed to get a coloured background
instead of funereal black I installed gparted and have managed to add a
partition to disk 2 and format it.

I've left the machine to update itself then will look into how to ensure
the second drive automounts on boot - I did know how to do it once upon a
time but need a refresher.

Very pleased so far, no speed records but it's perky enough and keeping my
brain working!

[Paul]

Post by Jeff Gaines

I hope the new (to me) machine will arrive tomorrow and will have the replies next to me while I install. I will let you know how it went...

Update 2
Left the machine on overnight and all was well this morning so hopefully I have struck lucky with the memory.
Added the DVD player this morning. Had to snap off a metal panel that has been sleeping peacefully for 13 years but no problems. Power was adjacent but needed to add a data cable, wangle it through the machine and find "P6" to plug it into. Fortunately the design is such that I could see an empty SATA socket but I had to slide the mobo out to reach it. Anyway did that and re-booted and all was well.
Then the biggy. Cleaned the two SSDs off (in Windows, I'm a coward) then put them in their converter and into slots 1 & 2.
Re-booted fine and chose "something else" as partitioning. Sadly way beyond my pay grade, I wanted everything except /home (or is it /user) on the first disk and /home on second. Problem is I do not have sufficient knowledge to know how much space to give each partition/folder so I went back and told it to take the whole 250 GB drive.
Once it had installed and I had managed to get a coloured background instead of funereal black I installed gparted and have managed to add a partition to disk 2 and format it.
I've left the machine to update itself then will look into how to ensure the second drive automounts on boot - I did know how to do it once upon a time but need a refresher.
Very pleased so far, no speed records but it's perky enough and keeping my brain working!

I made a picture for you, in a previous post.

Because the scrolling window is small, I had to glue pictures together
to get all the partitions into the one picture.

[Picture]

https://i.postimg.cc/1XpY0SnH/XFCE213-two-disk.gif

I did that in VirtualBox.

It's not really that hard to do, and if the partitioner
complains about something, you can just click the Back
button, and have another go at it.

Paul

[Jeff Gaines]

Post by Paul
I made a picture for you, in a previous post.
Because the scrolling window is small, I had to glue pictures together
to get all the partitions into the one picture.
[Picture]
https://i.postimg.cc/1XpY0SnH/XFCE213-two-disk.gif
I did that in VirtualBox.
It's not really that hard to do, and if the partitioner
complains about something, you can just click the Back
button, and have another go at it.

Yes, many thanks :-)

I think the setup with a small home directory on SSD1 and a directory for
video iso files on SSD2 will work for me. I have created an iso from a DVD
(in brasero) which worked well. HandBrake is estimating 25 hours on the HP
Microserver to turn it into an mkv file, an oldish i7 Window machine is
saying just under 1 hour. I'll see how it goes as it will steer me as to
where to do what.

[Paul]

Post by Jeff Gaines

Post by Paul
I made a picture for you, in a previous post.
Because the scrolling window is small, I had to glue pictures together
to get all the partitions into the one picture.
  [Picture]
   https://i.postimg.cc/1XpY0SnH/XFCE213-two-disk.gif
I did that in VirtualBox.
It's not really that hard to do, and if the partitioner
complains about something, you can just click the Back
button, and have another go at it.

Yes, many thanks :-)
I think the setup with a small home directory on SSD1 and a directory for video iso files on SSD2 will work for me. I have created an iso from a DVD (in brasero) which worked well. HandBrake is estimating 25 hours on the HP Microserver to turn it into an mkv file, an oldish i7 Window machine is saying just under 1 hour. I'll see how it goes as it will steer me as to where to do what.

If you're transcoding, you can run that on a video card
one-pass encoder. The hardware assist of the video card
encoder, runs 11x real time (330 frames processed per second
for a 30FPS movie). A two hour movie, changes from 1 hour
processing time, to around 12 minutes. Naturally, this
is going to depend on a few things. If you start modifying
the params, then it's no longer a "happy fun ball", and
it slows down.

For this to work, you need a video card with coder and
decoder built in. I have a cheesy GTX 1050 Ti, and it has
the NVDEC/NVENC decoder/encoder in it. An expensive card
like a Titan, would have three encoders, so you could process
three movies at once. But the processing speed (per logic block)
is pretty well equal on all the cards. (AMD cards have this
capability too, but I'd have to look up the names for that.
It's possible this was called AVIVO in the past.)

https://handbrake.fr/docs/en/latest/technical/video-nvenc.html

"Enabling support

Support for the NVIDIA NVENC and NVDEC is enabled in preferences on
the video tab. If your system is not supported, the option will be disabled.

On Linux, there is no preference to enable the encoder. It will
be available if the hardware / drivers report it as available.
"

You can see in that paragraph, that you would need to research
what needs to be enabled, so that flag is set true. Maybe Linux Handbrake
CAN do it, but you'll have to research that, and then your estimated
time will drop below an hour.

https://developer.nvidia.com/video-encode-and-decode-gpu-support-matrix-new

The correct library has to be selected in Synaptic, to turn on
such a capability, for programs that expect a library to deliver
the function. The info is not here.

https://handbrake.fr/docs/en/latest/technical/video-nvenc.html

( https://askubuntu.com/questions/1278137/how-can-i-use-nvidia-gpu-in-handbrake )

https://github.com/HandBrake/HandBrake/discussions/5726

It's just an annoying topic, to be sure. At least the h265 and h264 here, seem
to be specifying what video codec to use.

https://superuser.com/questions/1695702/how-to-use-handbrakecli-gpu-encoding

HandBrakeCLI -i in.mkv -o out.mkv -e nvenc_h265

# A command like this is attempting the same thing, only putting the job on a specific vid card

HandBrakeCLI -i file1.mkv -o output.mp4 -e nvenc_h264 --encopts="gpu=1"

Whether it's worth all this effort, depends on whether you're doing only
one movie, or you have 20TB of movies to process. If you have 20TB of movies,
sweating the details is damn important.

FFMPEG can also process movies, but the Linux one is not delivered
with NVENC and NVDEC compiled in. Since those functions are a binary
blob and would "taint" the delivered package, they're not included.
But on an OS like Ubuntu, the Synaptic libraries are all aligned
so that doing a source download and a custom build, will succeed.
I did that, just so I could bench NVENC on Windows and on Linux,
and the Linux one (thru FFMPEG) was a few percent faster.

Paul

[bad💽sector]

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and
can't believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual
booting or re-writing Grub.
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

Ok, have it your way :-)

We've both been banging Linux around for like 30 years or more but I
just saw "first attempt with Linux" and focused on that.

[Jasen Betts]

Post by Jeff Gaines
I want to install Linux with a 250 GB SSD for the OS and a 1 TB SSD for
"how to install Linux with one drive for Linux and one for data" and can't
believe the replies that came up! Most of them are about dual booting or
re-writing Grub.

Your request is somewhat unclear, but I'm guessing you want a separate
"/home" partition, based mostly on the language used. (if this is data
for services like a web server or database substitute "/var" for
"/home" )

Post by Jeff Gaines
I like Linux Mint xfce if that makes a difference.

I'm not not aware of that installer details. but this feature is fairly
straightforward to retrofit onto a normal install (start by installing
onto the 256) - this may be the easiet path. especially since command
line is easier to transmit over usenet than other UI interaction is.

Post by Jeff Gaines
Can anybody point me to a guide on this please? I have plenty of
experience doing it on Windows but this is the first attempt with Linux.

But if you do want to do the installer method, basically at the disk
partitioning and formatting stage do both drives, and put
"/" on the 256 and "/home" on the 1TB