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

Re: autopartkit vs. partman-auto

On Tuesday 20 June 2006 22:32, Steffen Joeris wrote:
> 22:00 < pere> white: if partman-auto can be fixed to do the things we
> need, I do not have any reason to keep autopartkit. But that include
> LVM support, creating ext3 fs with resize_inode option and scaling the
> partition sizes with the disk size.

LVM support is production ready, although of course I don't know if the 
implementation meets with your requirements.
The main limitation of partman-auto is that it only works on a single 
harddisk and thus is not really useable to set up multi-disk systems.
For the rest it is quite flexible and can be customized by adding the 
recipes you need.

As for the resize_inode option, Otavio has given you the answer as to 
libparted status. Realizing an alternative solution in partman would 
probably mean someone from debian-edu will have to do the work (or find 
someone) as we don't really have a lead partman maintainer.
If you can provide a patch that does not result in important regressions, 
that would be fine. But I seem to remember from an earlier thread that 
pere's proposed solution would mean losing the progress bar for ext3 


Attachment: pgp35l503_wnu.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: