Gilles Espinasse wrote: > Selon Jim Meyering <[email protected]>: >> Otavio Salvador wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Jim Meyering <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Yes, definitely. >> >> The reasons for removing functionality from the UI >> >> (code is dangerously buggy) apply equally well to the API. >> >> Actually removing the code will involve more work up front, >> >> but will be better in the long run. >> > >> > Fully agree the the code removal. It will also make our life easier >> > in future since we'll stop to receive fs-related bugs :-) >> >> Thanks for the feedback. >> FYI, here are the UI commands that I'm in the process of removing: >> >> mkpartfs >> mkfs >> check >> cp >> move >> resize >> >> So far, it's looking surprisingly easy. >> > You would need too to remove the optional fs part in mkpart.
Thanks for the feedback. However I don't think that part needs to go, since it just records the FS-TYPE in the newly created partition. It doesn't perform any file-system manipulation operation. Besides, if we remove it, that'd break scripts that use mkpart (with that optional argument), too. > Actually when you compile parted-1.9.0 without fs support, that's a bit > disturbing to have the fs-type part described as optional when in fact, that's > not supported at all. That sounds like a bug with --disable-fs (which I think I've never used!). _______________________________________________ parted-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel
