default partition scheme without /home - why ?

Andrew Farris lordmorgul at gmail.com
Tue Mar 11 00:19:28 UTC 2008


Les Mikesell wrote:
> Chris Snook wrote:
>>
>> If you can come up with a formula that properly handles anything from 
>> 2 GB (You can buy a brand-new EeePC Surf with this) to 1 TB, and 
>> correctly guesses how many OSes the user plans to multi-boot or 
>> virtualize, I'd be glad to go with that, but I can pretty much 
>> guarantee that it will piss off more people than the current default 
>> behavior, which cannot possibly be wrong, even if it's not always ideal.
>>
> 
> The current behavior is always wrong when it it time to reinstall and 
> you don't have a place to copy your work out while the new install 
> reformats.

No, its inconvenient in that case, while at the same time your backup plan is 
wrong/inadequate.  The partitioning scheme may have made this more convenient, 
but that is only true if the installer ASSUMES the prior /home is valid and can 
be used.  You make the assumption that it will always be a good idea for a new 
user to just install again without touching their /home.  They will do that, 
even when the filesystem on it is completely hosed.

Predicting this is as futile as predicting what hardware needs a random user 
will have when he walks into the front door of a computer store.

-- 
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul at gmail.com> www.lordmorgul.net
  gpg 0xC99B1DF3 fingerprint CDEC 6FAD BA27 40DF 707E A2E0 F0F6 E622 C99B 1DF3
No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer
----                                                                       ----




More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list