So how bad do we really want d-i to depend upon devfs? Here's what we've done to get around devfs. (This info is gathered from /proc/partitions dynamically.) /dev/sda /dev/sda1 /dev/sda2 /dev/sda3 /dev/sda4 /dev/sda5 /dev/discs/disc0/disc -> /dev/sda /dev/discs/disc0/part1 -> /dev/sda1 /dev/discs/disc0/part2 -> /dev/sda2 /dev/discs/disc0/part3 -> /dev/sda3 /dev/discs/disc0/part4 -> /dev/sda4 /dev/discs/disc0/part5 -> /dev/sda5 This gets around partitioner and partconf (albeit partconf shows the list twice, but that's easy enough to fix). So should I implement this kind of solution or would it be preferrable to teach partitioner and partconf about hda/sda and friends? Does either one lend easier support for 2.6? Thanks, Stephen -- Stephen R. Marenka If life's not fun, you're not doing it right! <stephen@marenka.net>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature