On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 11:47:02 +0000 Lisi Reisz <email@example.com> wrote: > On Sunday 20 March 2016 09:34:53 Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Sunday 20 March 2016 04:54:20 Adam Wilson wrote: > > > On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 22:21:58 +0000 > > > > > > Lisi Reisz <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > > > On Friday 18 March 2016 20:49:55 David Wright wrote: > > > > > It's far more likely that you forgot to format the partition, > > > > > if that's indeed what you wanted to do. > > > > > > > > No. I checked and double checked that the partitions on the > > > > disk which I wanted to use for installation were all marked > > > > with the F for format, and that nothing on the disk it had been > > > > told to leave alone had an F. It kept wanting to format the > > > > spare disk's swap, which I did not want. > > > > > > Why not? You wanted to carry over the swap created by a previous > > > installation? > > > > Doing that, leaving a potentially dirty swap for a new install? No > > sensible reason to do so, format that puppy. > > Am I the only person on this list who has ever wanted to install on > one disk and leave another alone for some reason? Surely not!! I > wanted to install on sda and leave sdb alone. So I told it not to > use sdb. Not to format sdb. Not to touch sdb. Why? Because I > didn't want sdb touched. I was not leaving a potentially dirty swap > for a new install. I was telling the new install not to use the > second disk. Sheesh. When I could see I would just have > disconnected sdb. It would then have been left alone. OK. What was on sdb? And even if you didn't want the rest of sdb touched, why didn't you simply direct the partitioner to format swap (which I assume was on sdb), but nothing else?
Description: OpenPGP digital signature