On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 01:01 +0930, Tim wrote: > I'm curious as to why installing from a live disc should be any better. > Surely it'd use the same basic routines. The install from live disc basically consists of copying the ext3 filesystem to disk and then resizing it after the copy -- which is why it's so fast, and also why you can't select which packages will be installed. > > The default partitioner is a bad feature of Fedora, > > and must have caused many problems. > > It's worked pretty well on everything that I've tried it on, I can't say > that I like the defaults (small boot, one / partition, one swap > partition), but the defaults are fine for many people, and the tool's > not too bad. I've certainly seen worse, and it's easier than doing > maths in your head, or on paper, to work out your partition sizing with > fdisk (planning what sizes you want for each). The one feature I'd > really like to add is for you to be able to type in the disc labels that > you want it to use, free-form. Seems there are a few common partitioning patterns. Maybe instead of a single default, Anaconda should offer a few of the more common patterns on a menu: "LVM with separate /home", "LVM with separate /home and /var", "Non-LVM/Direct partitions" OTOH, I can't see why you'd avoid LVM these days in most configurations. It's very stable, adds only very tiny overhead, and yet gives you a lot more flexibility for the future (disk migration, volume resizing, adding disks to existing filesystems, ...). It's saved my bacon numerous times. -Chris -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
