On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 06:15:25PM -0700, patrick keshishian wrote: > On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Nick Holland > <n...@holland-consulting.net> wrote: > > Daniel Malament wrote: > >> On 10/22/2009 5:37 AM, William Boshuck wrote: > >>>> And here I thought I remembered the new installer being described as > easier to use. > >> > >>> It is. Were it not so quick it would be positively > >>> boring. Just don't set mount points for the partitions > >> > >> Perhaps I should clarify: IMO, not double-checking with the user about > >> what specifically to wipe, especially when it used to, is a step back in > >> 'usability' (in the Jakob Nielsen sense) - or to put it another way, > >> user-friendliness. > > > > I presume you are talking about this question: > > > > The next step *DESTROYS* all existing data on these partitions! > > Are you really sure that you're ready to proceed? [no] y > > > > This question was asked AFTER you had fdisk'd and disklabled your > > disk. By this point, the data had been already potentially destroyed, > > I thought this question quite silly, in that it implies data has been > > safe up to this point...no, it hasn't, you have potentially been > > destroying things all over the place. > > Hey Nick, > > I don't wish to contradict you here, but ... I usually do installs and > never upgrades. So what I do is keep /home out of the mount points in > the disklabel stage, go through install, then re-add /home. I recall a > while back, I did get to this stage and agreed to proceed and as the > partitions were being newfs-ed I realized I had forgotten and included > /home in the list. I ^C out before the /home slice was reached. I > restarted the install, this time doing it "correctly", and my data in > /home was OK! > > Might have been a fluke ... but, it is what it is. > > --patrick >
Nick's point is that by the time the question came the disk setup could have been completely changed - new MBR partitions, different disklael layout of partitions. So the script really had no idea when it asked that question if your data was already gone. Thus it was misleading, and thus it was eliminated in the great 4.6 rewrite. .... Ken
