On Fri, 2012-07-13 at 12:08 -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote: > On Fri, 2012-07-13 at 10:18 -0500, David Lehman wrote: > > > On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 18:33 -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote: > > doesn't mean we wipe that single disk. Instead, we autopart any > > > > pre-existing free space on the disk. If that isn't enough space, we > > > > automatically shrinkany filesystems as needed. > > > > And how will we configure the bootloader in this case? If we don't feel > > comfortable removing existing partitions from disk, do we feel > > comfortable removing their existing bootloader without asking? > > Hm, let's walk through the bootloaders involved maybe? > > Pre-existing Fedora / Red Hat / CentOS / etc install - Can we add an > entry to the existing one? I don't think we've ever practiced modifying other OS' bootloader configurations. Does anyone have a sense that this might be an okay thing to do? > > Pre-existing Linux install - likely to be grub. Do we have to remove it > or can we add an entry to the existing one? Pretty much same as above. > > Pre-existing OS X install - Will Woods had an idea for detecting OS X > machines. So we could maybe give any pre-existing OS X users some kind > of special message, like, 'go to bootcamp' or whatnot. We better not > blow away their OS X bootloader unless they just want to wipe it all (+1 > to those folks.) What kind of config is needed to chainload the linux > install for Macs? If it requires manual config, is there any way to have > some kind of walkthrough for doing that manual config available and > referenced both in the installer and elsewhere? Is that manual config > hard? > > Pre-existing Windows XP and up install - Same thing here, better to not > blow away and chain load? What manual config is involved here? We'd have to ask someone who's used the windows/osx bootloader how much work it is to add a linux entry. I have no idea. > > > Also, is there ever a case where it's possible to blow away the > pre-existing OS X or Windows bootloader and configure grub to point to > the boot sector instead? Again, you'd have to ask users of windows and osx about this. You can probably guess my personal preference. People are going to be pissed no matter what happens here. Some would be mad if we took over the system bootloader role, while others would be mad if we didn't set things up to boot their new Fedora install without any intervention on their part. There's something to be said for the notion that if you care about what we're going to do to your system you should probably click on some stuff and check on it before you proceed with the actual install process. To me, that suggests we should default to taking over the system bootloader role, if that's even possible on all platforms. Dave > > ~m > > > _______________________________________________ > Anaconda-devel-list mailing list > Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
