On 1/29/19, David Wright <deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > However, the second method uses manual partitioning of the disks with > gdisk, so I don't see why sda should not contain a(nother) FAT > partition which is ignored.
I don't see why either. Also, given the fact that so many, entirely fine computers (with 4+ Gibs RAM!) are being discarded/discontinued on a yearly basis (mostly for software related issues or just because they are "old"), why shouldn't people keep the a very small (less than 64Mbs) diagnostic partition from the manufacturer on sda1 and use the rest of the space for the installation? Is it because the unencrypted root partition wants to sit on sda1? At the very least the Debian installer should explicitly tell you: "no, you can't install and encrypted volume on just a partition (hopefully: 'because . . .')" > If the sda partition numbers are all > increased by one How do you do that? and, can you revert the partition numbers back if the need arises? I think most probably that won't be the solution and/or may create other problems. > which command is it that would prevent the > method from working? How could you find out about it? lbrtchx
