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