On Thu, 2026-08-06 at 21:08 +0200, Holger Wansing wrote: > Kevin Locke <[email protected]> wrote (Mon, 27 Jul 2026 11:31:46 -0600): >> To summarize the options we've discussed and add a few of my own: >> >> 1. Leave the issue unsolved for netboot. >> Pros: >> - Only affects netboot (more often used by power users) >> - No additional changes required. >> Cons: >> - Users may still inadvertently overwrite the installation media >> (interactively or preseed). >> 2. Prompt to use install media when starting partman on netboot. >> Pros: >> - Nearly eliminates risk of overwriting installation media. >> - Relatively simple to implement. >> Cons: >> - Adds time/complexity/effort for all users. >> - Non-interactive preseeds must be updated for netboot, and >> requirements will differ between netboot and other media. >> 3. Prompt to modify installation media at key points. >> If it's infeasible to ask for every action which might affect a >> disk, perhaps we could ask at key points? For example, >> during/after "If you continue, the changes below will be written to >> the disks" and when installing the bootloader? >> Pros: >> - Reduces risk of overwriting installation media. >> - Only users at risk of overwriting must answer the question. >> Cons: >> - Implementation complexity. >> - May not cover all cases. >> 4. Add a non-user-visible debconf prompt to allow overwriting >> installation media. Default to allow. >> Pros: >> - Gives preseed authors a mechanism to use to prevent overwriting. >> - Relatively simple to implement. >> - No time/complexity/effort for most users. >> Cons: >> - Users may still inadvertently overwrite the installation media >> (interactively or preseed) in the default state. >> >> Does that match your understanding as well? If there are other >> options, or other pros and cons worth considering, please chime in. >> >> My preference would be 3 > 4 > 1 > 2, but I'll defer to your >> expertise and implementation willingness. > > I tend to option 1. > The MR would be ready for this, and using this, we would at least have a > solution for the most relevant use cases (leaving out power-user use-cases > via netboot images). > Waiting for the big solution, which deals with all use cases seems to > make us wait for a longer time (if not for ever), and will most likely > not be implemented before Forky. > > Objections?
None from me. It's a pragmatic solution that I support. Thanks again for implementing it! Cheers, Kevin
