Re: [Fwd: Re: Status for reiser support in d-i]

[Yury Umanets <umka@namesys.com>]

On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 12:40, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 12:04:06PM +0400, Yury Umanets wrote:
> > > > > but there should be no problem at least to use
> > > > > parted standalone in place of cfdisk. 
> > > > 
> > > > > But then, parted is less user
> > > > > friendly than cfdisk.
> > > > This is disputable question actually :) Some people like prated much
> > > > more then cfdisk.
> > > 
> > > Well, sure, but as it will be used for the end user, a cfdisk like
> > > thingy would be better suited.
> > okay, probably cfdisk's interface is liked more by end users. But this
> > mean, that somebody should improve parted interface (ncurses, etc) :)
> 
> I think there is something really wrong with parted.

It is good, that Andrew Clause did not hear what you said :)

>  It should contain
> only the interface stuff, and let the real code sit in libparted,
actually it is exactly what you said. 

Parted itself contains commands handling, readline callbacks, list
implementation, etc.
>  but
> this is not the case. There is some code in parted, which if doing
> another interface, will need to be rewritten or separated.

parted is a front end first of all which uses libparted. Anybody is able
to implement another front end based on libparted.

But when I said, about improving parted interface, I meant, that
somebody should write a patch exactly to making parted to use ncurses or
something like this. I've not meant to write another front end. Actually
there is one called qtparted.

> 
> As such, i think the real code in parted should be moved either in
> libparted or another library, and different people should write spearate
> interfaces for it.
> 
> Friendly,
> 
> Sven Luther

Regards.