On Fri, 2016-02-26 at 14:03 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2016-02-24 at 09:40 -0500, David Lehman wrote: > > > > > "This means that if the installer offers mechanisms for resizing > > > storage volumes, then it must run the appropriate resizing tool > > > with > > > the appropriate parameters for the resize the user chooses. The > > > reason > > > What is the appropriate tool (and parameters) for resizing the > > formatting on a device with unrecognized/unknown formatting? > > I don't believe we explicitly considered that question at the time of > writing the criterion. However, my interpretation as the person who > drafted it (IIRC) would be that the "appropriate tool" for any > partition with data on it is a tool which is at least *intended* to > preserve the data. > > In an ideal world, with no specific technical concerns, it would be > my > expectation that we would not offer an operation named "resize" in > the > case where we have no idea how to preserve any contents of the > volume. > We would only offer an operation named "resize" in cases where we do > actually have some idea how to perform a non-destructive resize. I'm > entirely open to there being technical reasons why this is not > possible, though. It is not possible to distinguish between a lack of meaningful data and meaningful data that the OS has no means of recognizing. A partition type flag or GUID is not generally sufficient for this purpose. We do have the option to prevent resize of devices with no formatting or unrecognized formatting. You could certainly argue that it makes more sense to remove such a device than to resize it if you need more space. I'll just explain that it's in the name of protecting careless users when the bugs start coming in. David _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
