Thiemo Seufer wrote: > I guess you used partman (as parted frontend). Currently, this is the > default on all m68k, but rather due to a bug in partman which I fixed > today. According to the source, partitioner/partconf is supposed to > run instead, with a comment nearby "[partman is] slow and doesn't > support the atari subarch". > > So I have now some questions: > - Should partman generally be used for m68k? This reqires some work on > on partman for atari, or atari has to be dropped. > - Should partman be used for all subarchitectures except atari? This > needs a subarch check in partman for m68k like it is done in the > bootloader stuff. > - Should partitioner/partconf generally be used? It's faster, but has > some long standing bugs, a less flexible layout, and most developers > won't care much about it. - Is partman too slow to be used on m68k? Though apparently it's really bad on hppa and it's being used there. There does exist the option of optimising it a bit.. > And WRT beta4: > - Should the fixed version of partman be uploaded for a beta4 update? > It changes behaviour on m68k, mips and s390; only m86k is in beta4 > so far. (For mips, this update is needed for SGI aubarchitectures, > that is, all currently supported ones.) I don't know about m68k, but for mips it seems yes, and we can copy the update to testing for just the arches we choose and not have to worry about breaking others. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature