On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 12:52:27PM +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: > Am Sam, den 01.11.2003 schrieb Sven Luther um 12:12: > > On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 11:17:45AM +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: > > > Am Sam, den 01.11.2003 schrieb Sven Luther um 10:45: > > > > On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 09:50:54AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > > > > > Currently, the steps order looks like : > > > Partitioner calls parted or cfdisk. It just searches for hard-disks and > > > starts the appropiate partitioning programm for the particular > > > arch/subarch. If it does not start the correct program for you, you > > > should add or modify the script which starts the partitioning program in > > > partconf. > > > > Ah, ok, so partishioner is not a nice text-graphical frontend to > > libparted as i thought it was. I have never seen it actually, since it > > has never worked on pegasos. > It should start parted, but partitioner 0.11 needs to be uploaded for it > to work (wrong path to archdetect).
Mmm, who is the maintainer of partitioner, and why does a fixed version not get uploaded ? is there a source apt repository for the udebs we use, and can we look at them with apt-cache ? > > > > The next step would be partconf, which will also write the fstab, as > > > > discussed elsewhere. > > > not for autopartkit which also does format and mount partitions. > > > > So, the choice then is : > > > > auto partitioning -> autopartkit > > manual partitioning -> partitioner + partconf. > > > > I don't know if partitioner will provide choice of multiple partitioning > > programs (cfdisk or parted, amiga-fdisk or parted, etc ...) or not. > This could be implemented in the partitoner scripts. Ok. > > But again, i agree with the idea of not running autopartkit > > automatically like it seems to be done right now, but have it fill in > > automatically defined partition data to a common partitioning tool, > > which will allow a manual feedback, and eventually small modifications > > of the automated selection if wanted. But then maybe it does already do > > that, my only interaction with it was when it ate my partition table. > Right now autopartkit is quite simple, just take the defaults or leave > it. There is some code to make it smarter, but the implementation is not > finished. Mmm. > >From your description of what happend, I think it was not autopartkit > but partconf, which had a bug which lead to formating the wrong > partition at that time, who ate your disk. Nope, i think it was both. autopartkit ate my partition table, and partconf began formating my first partition, thus erasing all my boot kernels. > > > > Everything else is a less than satisfactory solution, but then nobody > > > > seems to care, i am busy with powerpc kernels right now, and nobody has > > > > confirmed that this is even possible (or not) with the current modular > > > > main menu approach. > > > So probably everyone is busy fixing bugs in the installer and nobody > > > cares to introduce new ones :-) > > > > But having a setup which is prone to erasing pre-installed disks is > > something which is worth looking at, and there is a critical bugreport > > against autopartkit. > It is currently very difficult to track this down, because it is not > even clear if it's an autopartkit bug. Both autopartkit and partconf > issue warnings to the user before doing anything, so I don't know how > this happend to you without you seeing the warning. because the display was hosed, and i had only a black screen to look at ? Because partconf and autopartkit only offered the continue button and no abort or something such ? I don't remember exactly, and i can't really retry it, since i lost everything that was on the disk, including the d-i initrd. About the warning, every disk touching program issue such warning, user mostly have come to ignore them. But autopartkit is potentially more dangerous, and should have a more flashy warning than the usual "this will erase all data" one. > > > OK, I will try to answer this to my best knowledge: > > > It's not easily possible with the current design. You can not have > > > submenus in main-menu and because main-menu is just another debconf > > > question with priority medium it's only shown if the debconf priority is > > > medium or lower. Normal installations start at high and therefore do not > > > show main-menu unless there was an error. > > > So the short answer is: This is somehow a problem of the modularity of > > > debian-installer and it is not easy to fix it in a sane manner without > > > changing the design of the installer. > > > > So, work for post-sarge debian-installer maybe. Still the current state > > of things is broken, and will cause much grief to our users once sarge > > is released. > I think the most important thing will be that the installation manual > has to stress the fact that if you want more control over the > installation and do fancy things you need to lower the debconf priority. > gaudenz And maybe someway to detect that the harddisk is already partitioned, and not offering autopartkit by default in this case. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
