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

Bug#237534: inst report: lots of partman and LVM issues

Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > It's useful if you don't like the scheme you chose, or if you didn't
> > choose to autopartition, or if you edit something and mess it up, etc.
> Would it be possible to only show it when it actually is useful.  In
> my case, choosing it basically was a noop.

I don't see how it could be a no-op. At a minium, you could choose the
other partitioning scheme.

> > I agree. Unfortunatly, the default partitioner currently varies by
> > architecture, so we cannot call one "Partiton disks (old partitioner)".
> > I am relucatant to pull in terminology the user won't understand, such
> > as "Partition disks (partman)". Suggestions?
> Not sure.  Maybe "Partition disks" and "Partition disks (cfdisk)"
> since cfdisk might be a term people understand... but that's not ideal
> either.  I'm sorry I don't have a good solution either. :/

cfdisk is not used on all architectures. There's also the queston of
what to call partconf.

see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: