[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: daily builds

okay, so what I have right now is a little shell script that is starting to play
with partitions and asking the user questions via debconf.  I am expecting the
script to take command line arguments similar (identicali? for a while at least)
to GNU parted. As we add support for things that parted can't handle we'll
depend on other tools.

When running interactively the first thing the user sees is the list of 5 things
you have written there (minus create filesystem? Joey has indicated that should
be a separate module, I think.) and minus anything the tool figued out
that it cannot do to the device in question (resize partitions, for example.)

The script calls the necessary tools to do the job and then exists when the user
is finished.  I'm not completely sure how to make this modular across archs and
tools, I'll have to think about that. For right now I'll be just using parted.

I started playing in C but with parted, at least, a shell script is really



Tue, Jan 23, 2001 at 04:00:58PM +1100 wrote:
> David Whedon wrote:
> > 
> > I'm looking again into a partitioning tool using libparted. From what I've
> > looked at selectdevice and kdetect I won't be duplicating any work.  I plan on
> > being handed a device, I'll then prompt the user for how they want it
> > partitioned? Sound good?
> > 
> yep,
> I think expect to given a whole device (eg hda) or a partition (eg hda1)
> and a function.
> parted could be used for
> 1) creating partitions
> 2) deleting partitions
> 3) resizing partitions (depending on the filesystem)
> 4) moving a partition (depending on the filesystem)
> 5) creating filesystems 
> But on architectures that parted doesnt work on these functions (at
> least 1, 2 5) will be handled by different tools, so we need to seperate
> the required function from the tool that is to do the work.
> Seperating the commands from the tools will also make it easier for
> automated installs (or wizards).
> Thats how i see it at the moment.
> Glenn

Reply to: