[opensuse-factory] YaST-partitioner defaults to delete existing LVMs upon install
Hello, currently, YaST-partitioner will suggest to delete existing LVMs and re-partition the free space for a new installation. This is clearly a very bad idea for anyone who runs openSUSE in an LVM-environment. It should be no problem at all to change this non-sensical default as the YaST is perfectly capable of making a 100%-accurate LVM-based partitioning proposal that not only keeps the existing LVM intact but also suggests to re-format (LVM-)root only and create a mount-point for the existing (LVM-)/home. Unfortunately the bug has been declared 'INVALID' quickly and without discussion. I stil think that this behavior of the partitioner is highly undesirable and could easily be changed. So I would like a public discussion of this bug on this mailing-list; please take the time to have a look at it: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=328929 Thanks, Chris --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Christian Jäger wrote:
Hello,
currently, YaST-partitioner will suggest to delete existing LVMs and re-partition the free space for a new installation. This is clearly a very bad idea for anyone who runs openSUSE in an LVM-environment.
It should be no problem at all to change this non-sensical default as the YaST is perfectly capable of making a 100%-accurate LVM-based partitioning proposal that not only keeps the existing LVM intact but also suggests to re-format (LVM-)root only and create a mount-point for the existing (LVM-)/home.
Unfortunately the bug has been declared 'INVALID' quickly and without discussion.
I stil think that this behavior of the partitioner is highly undesirable and could easily be changed.
So I would like a public discussion of this bug on this mailing-list; please take the time to have a look at it:
In the maintainers comments when he dismissed the 'bug', he stated it wasn't a bug (true) but was a decision the decision makers would have to make. He did not state how to contact those decision makers. Do you, or anyone know how to contact those decision makers save by filing buglist reports? I notice no end of 'Enhancement' type of buglist entries which also are not bugs. Would it also not be an enhancement to have a popup state that a LVM or /home or some other potentially valuable structure has been detected and offer the option of A)saving the structureand protecting existing data, B) delete and reusing the media C) saving the structure but clearing the data. True the experienced user could already do this as the maintainer pointed out, but to summarily choose option B as it does now begs for human errors to occur. How does this question reach the decision makers? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Hi! I have filed the request (refering to this bug) to our feature database to be processed for future releases. I agree with Thomas that the current behavior is what had been requested by now and can imagine that if it is changed, others may complain, thus it needs to be evaluated properly, anyway your suggestion makes more sense to me. Jiri Dne Monday 01 of October 2007 14:32:46 Richard Creighton napsal(a):
Christian Jäger wrote:
Hello,
currently, YaST-partitioner will suggest to delete existing LVMs and re-partition the free space for a new installation. This is clearly a very bad idea for anyone who runs openSUSE in an LVM-environment.
It should be no problem at all to change this non-sensical default as the YaST is perfectly capable of making a 100%-accurate LVM-based partitioning proposal that not only keeps the existing LVM intact but also suggests to re-format (LVM-)root only and create a mount-point for the existing (LVM-)/home.
Unfortunately the bug has been declared 'INVALID' quickly and without discussion.
I stil think that this behavior of the partitioner is highly undesirable and could easily be changed.
So I would like a public discussion of this bug on this mailing-list; please take the time to have a look at it:
In the maintainers comments when he dismissed the 'bug', he stated it wasn't a bug (true) but was a decision the decision makers would have to make. He did not state how to contact those decision makers. Do you, or anyone know how to contact those decision makers save by filing buglist reports? I notice no end of 'Enhancement' type of buglist entries which also are not bugs. Would it also not be an enhancement to have a popup state that a LVM or /home or some other potentially valuable structure has been detected and offer the option of A)saving the structureand protecting existing data, B) delete and reusing the media C) saving the structure but clearing the data. True the experienced user could already do this as the maintainer pointed out, but to summarily choose option B as it does now begs for human errors to occur. How does this question reach the decision makers? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
-- Regards, Jiri Srain YaST Team Leader --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s.r.o. e-mail: jsrain@suse.cz Lihovarska 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 959 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz
participants (3)
-
Christian Jäger -
Jiri Srain -
Richard Creighton