On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 08:44:27AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Friday 04 January 2019 08:15:11 Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 09:22:49PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > In this case, I hate to sound like > > > an ass, but perhaps a re-install is in the future, doing the > > > reinstall to a new drive [...] > > > > Come on, people. Show some sense. (And yes, this includes the OP.) > > > > He simply has a full root file system. He has shown the df output at > > least twice now. > > > > (A full root file system clearly and plainly shown by df despite the > > OP claiming he is certain he's not out of space, no less.) > > I don't have an argument against any of that Greg, but lets clarify one > thing here and now for the OP. Several responders keep using the "/root" > to describe what you clearly intend to be interpreted as the root of the > filesystem, AKA "/" when in 99.99% of the installs /root is the > sysadmin's home DIRECTORY, and not the root of the filesystem. No, but /root is customarily in the root file system (mounted on /), and it happens some times that there are things forgotten in there (e.g. from manually installed packages, admin sessions squirreling away backups of things, etc). Not a recommended pattern, but it happens. I did interpret the proposals to look into /root in this vein. Cheers -- t
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature