Re: New partition sizes in default recipes for d-i
Hi,
Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> wrote (Mon, 23 Sep 2024 19:59:41 +0200):
> On 23/09/2024 àat 16:57, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> >
> > Testing a local build against unstable, with a regular BIOS-based setup,
> > I'm seeing a failure to automatically partition a 5G disk, which I'd
> > call a major regression.
>
> Which method and recipe did you use ?
>
> With a 5GB disk, the only available recipe should be "small_disk"
> without LVM. On BIOS setup it requires at least 2.5GB disk space so it
> should not fail on a 5GB disk (I just tested).
> Other recipes require 7.5-12.5GB, so they should not be offered.
I guess that's just another case of the "reuse" feature leading to
unexpected results, as in
https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2024/09/msg00094.html
MR!17 has been filed to fix this bug. See
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/partman-auto/-/merge_requests/17
A test with a freshly generated QEMU disk with 5G size shows no errors here,
the only provided recipe is the "small disk (<10G) partitioning scheme",
leading to a 4.7G root partition and 701 MB swap.
The rest of the installation completed without error.
>
> > I'm not sure *where* I'd put the limit, but failing to partition a 5G
> > or 10G disk really doesn't seem acceptable to me.
>
> Our assumption was that guided partitioning primarily targeted casual
> desktop/laptop users who want to install a standard system with a
> desktop environement, so we raised the limits of the "standard" recipes
> (atomic, home, multi) to enforce this use case. The "small_disk" recipe
> was added to support small disks in other use cases.
>
> Maybe we went to far ?
Looks fine to me as it is...
Holger
--
Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org>
PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508 3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076
Reply to: