On Sunday 20 March 2016 15:53:43 Gene Heskett wrote: > On Sunday 20 March 2016 07:47:02 Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Sunday 20 March 2016 09:34:53 Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Sunday 20 March 2016 04:54:20 Adam Wilson wrote: > > > > On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 22:21:58 +0000 > > > > > > > > Lisi Reisz <lisi.re...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Friday 18 March 2016 20:49:55 David Wright wrote: > > > > > > It's far more likely that you forgot to format the partition, > > > > > > if that's indeed what you wanted to do. > > > > > > > > > > No. I checked and double checked that the partitions on the > > > > > disk which I wanted to use for installation were all marked with > > > > > the F for format, and that nothing on the disk it had been told > > > > > to leave alone had an F. It kept wanting to format the spare > > > > > disk's swap, which I did not want. > > > > > > > > Why not? You wanted to carry over the swap created by a previous > > > > installation? > > > > > > Doing that, leaving a potentially dirty swap for a new install? No > > > sensible reason to do so, format that puppy. > > > > Am I the only person on this list who has ever wanted to install on > > one disk and leave another alone for some reason? Surely not!! I > > wanted to install on sda and leave sdb alone. So I told it not to use > > sdb. Not to format sdb. Not to touch sdb. Why? Because I didn't > > want sdb touched. I was not leaving a potentially dirty swap for a > > new install. I was telling the new install not to use the second > > disk. Sheesh. When I could see I would just have disconnected sdb. > > It would then have been left alone. OK. > > > > I regard that as a sensible reason. > > > > Lisi > > The problem with that is that unless you edit fstab before the initial > reboot, (difficult to do) to remove the auto-found swap partition on > sdb, it will be found and mounted. But by then it likely has been > formatted anyway.
I didn't and it didn't. Lisi
