Edward Dekkers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I said that I cannot imagine a case where I would want all partitions
on all disk drives to be removed during an OS install. Despite your
claims, I still would never want all partitions on all disk drives to be
removed during an OS install. Not
Anthony E. Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Douglas Alan wrote:
No it wouldn't. It is never reasonable to destroy large amounts of
data without being quite sure that that is what the user wants.
If that were true, then 'rm -i' would be default behavior, and the
'-f' option would not
On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 06:03:25AM -0500, Douglas Alan wrote:
It could start by not zeroing partitions on disk drives uninvolved in
the OS installation, since there is no reason for it to do that.
This is the part where I don't follow you.
If partitions have not been created, how is the
Emmanuel Seyman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It could start by not zeroing partitions on disk drives uninvolved in
the OS installation, since there is no reason for it to do that.
This is the part where I don't follow you. If partitions have not
been created, how is the kickstart program
-Original Message-
From: Douglas Alan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 12:38 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Remove all existing partitions
Emmanuel Seyman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It could start by not zeroing partitions on disk drives
Ward William E DLDN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doug, I've read these messages and I've come to a conclusion: You are
one of those people who screws up, and then says I'm the innocent
victim! It's somebody else's fault!
I don't claim to be any sort of innocent victim -- I have merely
noticed
Automatic Network Disk Archiver)
man cron (Schedule something to happen)
/B
- Original Message -
From: Douglas Alan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 14:01
Subject: Re: Remove all existing partitions
Ward William E DLDN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
LARGE SNIP
I already said mea culpa to the department head and she said mea
culpa for not backing up her computer. (Fortunately, there was nothing
particularly important on the computer.) Now it's time for Red Hat to
say mea culpa about having a flaw in their software and to fix it, and
Edward Dekkers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about I freely admit that Kickstart should not erase drives you've
explicitly told it not to.
Sounds good to me.
You're right. It shouldn't.
But please have a think about things you shouldn't do. Seriously, when
we get PCs in here for
David Busby wrote:
I'm in the boat with the folks who say read the manual and such.
Then you're on the wrong boat. It appalls me the level of software
quality that some people will not only put up with, but defend. I say
this as a software engineer, myself. If someone came to me and pointed
Douglas Alan wrote:
Anthony E. Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's a mighty literal interpretation of all when it comes to
valuable data. I can't imagine any circumstance when I would want all
partitions on all disk drives to be removed during an OS install,
1. You get a Windows computer from
Anthony E. Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In fact, I explicitly told Kickstart to *only* make partitions on
the boot disk drive. It has no good reason to mess with the
partition tables of disk drives that it is not putting partitions
onto.
You're evadng the point.
No, I am not.
You
Douglas Alan wrote:
The point is that in those cases, kickstart's behavior would be
entirely reasonable.
No it wouldn't. It is never reasonable to destroy large amounts of data
without being quite sure that that is what the user wants.
If that were true, then 'rm -i' would be default behavior,
I said that I cannot imagine a case where I would want all partitions
on all disk drives to be removed during an OS install. Despite your
claims, I still would never want all partitions on all disk drives to be
removed during an OS install. Not for the two cases that you provided
(#2 of
Anthony E. Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Douglas Alan wrote:
I haven't used kickstart myself but I would expect it to remove all
partitions on all disks if you told it to remove all existing
partitions ..
That's a mighty literal interpretation of all when it comes to
valuable data. I
* make partitions on the boot
disk drive. It has no good reason to mess with the partition tables of
disk drives that it is not putting partitions onto.
In your view yes, in my view no. Just seeing the words Remove all
existing partitions, immediately meant to me, it will remove every
partition
such a counter view. Furthermore, there would never
be any advantage to removing partitions on a disk drive uninvolved in
the OS install. No software should ever behave in a way that has no
advantage over othe more reasonable behaviors.
Just seeing the words Remove all existing partitions
nate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Umm, if I had, err, by chance, configured Kickstart to remove all
existing partitions, it wouldn't happen to remove all partitions on ALL
disk drives, would it, and not just the boot disk drive?
I haven't used kickstart myself but I would expect it to remove
Douglas Alan wrote:
I haven't used kickstart myself but I would expect it to remove all
partitions on all disks if you told it to remove all existing
partitions ..
That's a mighty literal interpretation of all when it comes to
valuable data. I can't imagine any circumstance when I would want all
Umm, if I had, err, by chance, configured Kickstart to remove all
existing partitions, it wouldn't happen to remove all partitions on ALL
disk drives, would it, and not just the boot disk drive?
And if it would, is there any way that I might recover them? (The ones
on the other disk drives
20 matches
Mail list logo
