Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> in a previous message to this list from Colin Watson
> (http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2005/09/msg00209.html) a set of patches
> were made available to make partman-auto-lvm (pal from now) more complete
> and somehow working.
>
> Unfortunatly i did delete the sequencial patches by mistakes. I am sorry about
> it but i have prepared again a full diff with explanations of why stuff has
> been implemented in a certain way.
Where is the wayback machine or google cache when you need them. Oh
well, thanks for doing the work again.
Some questions:
- Is the partman-auto-lvm setup modifyable with lvmcfg afterwards?
- IIRC powerpc is not the only arch where parted doesn't understand
lvm. Should we disable it for the others too?
- One of the things I hd wondered about using LVM is if it would be
better to not use up all the free space in the VG by default, and
leave some fraction for when the user decides to grow one of their
partitions. Any thoughts/experience on that.
- Are you gonna help us maintain this going forward? :-)
> Please note that there is a lot of polish that can/must be done. When I started
> hacking on pal, i didn't realize how much code duplication was pulled in and
> definetely there are several bits that can be designed better.
FWIW, the reason for most of that duplication is that partman-auto-lvm
was written in the middle of the sarge release process and we didn't
want to make the obvious changes to partman-auto and risk breaking it,
so duplicated the code instead. It would be good to get rid of that
duplication.
> The easiest would be to add a flag that will make that recipe looks like:
>
> 8 1 1 boot-prep
> $primary{ }
> $bootable{ }
> method{ prep } .
> $nolvm{ }.
>
> (flag is just an idea and name up for discussion... so please don't take this as
> absolute statement, as well it can be the other way around.. canbelvm{ } flag on
> the other partitions ;))
This seems like a good approach to me.
> As last note about the patch automatically_partition/vg_all_free/choices has
> been disabled because of http://bugzilla.ubuntu.com/show_bug.cgi?id=15017
> but perhaps there might be work arounds for it that i am not aware of.
> Mostlikely one you d-i guru's will have an answer.
Not offhand.. if the it's not working I'd favour removing it entirely
until fixed and adding a TODO item.
--
see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature