[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 1.Thanks, 2.Bug(?)

From: Andrew Clausen
Subject: Re: 1.Thanks, 2.Bug(?)
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 03:29:01 +1100
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

Hi Wlodek,

On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 03:21:51PM +0100, Wlodek Drabent wrote:
> I encountered something which may be a bug:
> I could not enlarge the last fat partition to the very end of the
> disk.  parted created in it a fat filesystem smaller than the
> partition.

I doubt this is the case... Parted will complain if you run "check"
on the partition... could you try doing this?

>  And any attempt of enlarging by "resize" failed, 
> resulting in a partition without the last cylinder.

Parted doesn't permit this, because other programs don't like it.

> (Also, parted was able to create overlapping partitions.


> Also, other tools complained about its results.  For instance cfdisk
> called after parted displayed NC for partitions not modified by
> parted). 

Can you give me instructions for reproducing this?

> Could I also suggest an improvement?  It would be VERY useful if
> before writing anything to the disk parted asked for a confirmation,
> displaying a description of what is going to be done.
> Now the user does not know, for instance, how the numbers she types
> are actually interpreted.

In future (near future)... it will warn the user if it's going to
do something significantly different to what the user asked.

> Providing a spec file to create an rpm, instead of normal installing,
> is a GREAT idea.  Advertise it better.  I believe that for almost
> everybody this way of installing/uninstalling is much better.

Most people will probably use RPMs from their distribution.
Those who compile themselves probably want to set configure
options, etc. so I don't think it affects many people.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]