On 05/15/2015 08:12 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Using LVM solves some problems, but it also adds complications. YaST would have to add modules to handle LVM and the resizing. Plus rescue ops...
As I've pointed out, as the originator/documenter of Suse LVM, Michael Hasenstein pointed out, the Yast1 LVM GUI was much better than the YAST2 version :-( But that is a shortcoming of YAST2 not of LVM. As it happens I don't, never have, used to manage LVM. I always use the command line. And as I keep saying, if you don't try anything fancy like striping across multiple spindles, its straight forward and easy.
I have seen people that installed the system using LVM unawares, then having problems that impeded booting, and having to reformat the disk after asking for help because nobody who understood LVM was available to help the chap.
Don't make me laugh. You CAN"T install LVM "unawares". As we keep raising, its not a default. You HAVE to explicitly create it and all the LVs. Its not going to happen with the yast installer "just because....". As with so many things, if you go into it all blind and think you can hack your way around then expect things to go wrong, the unexpected to happen. If you don't approach in an informed manner, .... Well would you start C programming without learning the grammar? Hey, its not really like FORTRAN or PASCAL! And there is of course a "that was then, this is now" aspect. You mention booting. I use grub2 and know that some here think its wrong-headed and that LILO or grub1.x are the true God-Given ways to boot. Yes, but they won't allow /boot and / to be on a LV. And I've already mentioned that while, with grub2, /boot can be on a LV, that doesn't play well with the Rescue system DVD, so make it a physical partition. All this is not just Anton sounding off, there's a lot of up to date documentation on the 'net, easily available. Don't read the "old stuff" read the up to date stuff. So... Yes it used to be, but we changed all that. Wrote What's with this "proficient"? Perhaps you'd like to maintain that Ted is having this problem with / being full because he isn't proficient with fdisk? Well pardon me! I remember in the pre-Linux days, installing SCO UNIX on a machine a couple of times just to see how much space the system took, how much space there was if I set up separate /tmp, /usr/ and so on, so I could better provision for the database that was going to be installed, since it was the database, not the root FS, that would be growing! I experimented planned rather than just accepted what the vendor gave me.
As many other things that can be done. But install LVM by default, and with several partitions? No. Keep the default as simple as possible.
The "as simple as possible" attitude is a bit ... Well, hypocritical, considering we're using technology that is a long way removed from Babbage's Mill, even from the clear and discrete logic of the original 8086. Modern chips are so integrated, so complex, its mindboggling! The KISS would have us back at UNIX of the mid 1970s with the V6/V7 file system, and the simple internal table. K&R&gang made the point that there was no need for complex kernel algorithms if the proc table only had a few dozen entries; if the were only a few hundred files on the disk a couple of levels deep ... And so on. But we've long since left that simple as possible behind. Compared to managing a SSD, compared to the stuff needed to maintain a BtrFS system, compared to managing repositories (either with Zypper or Yast) setting up and managing a LVM and LVs *IS* simple! -- /"\ \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML Mail / \ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org