On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 09:57:19 +0300, Ville Herva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 08:25:44AM +1000, you [Andrew Clausen] wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 05:15:45PM +0300, Ville Herva wrote: > > > (parted) move 2 32kB 110GB > > > > > > Error: Can't move a partition onto itself. Try using resize, perhaps? > > > > > > What I don't perfectly understand is why this is so hard to implement. > > > Isn't > > > this just a case of copying the 110GB in 10GB (or smaller) chunks towards > > > the beginning of the disk? I'm probably missing something, right? > > > > The implementation you suggest is dangerous. If, for example, there > > were a blackout halfway during the process, you would lose your > > data. > > That's true (well, unless you keep a log of which chunks have been moved so > that you can continue or revert the operation after such incident.) > > Perhaps the feature could still be offered as a "dangerous" operation > requiring confirmation, --force switch or such? In my case, I have a > backup. > > I would assume not all the other parted options are 100% power-loss proof - > for example the various fs resize operations?
All Parted operations are theoretically power-loss proof, including resizing supported FS. I think introducing non power-loss proof operations could be disturbing. It would be better to write another program to perform such operations. Cheers, Guillaume Knispel _______________________________________________ Bug-parted mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-parted
