Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:34:52 -0800 From: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@winston.freebsd.org> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proposed auto-sizing patch to sysinstall (was Re: Using a larger block size on large filesystems) Message-ID: <44607.1008027292@winston.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> of "Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:11:10 PST." <200112102311.fBANBA849291@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I don't hate it, but I wish you had done it before I invested all > sorts of time in this. Sorry, but as I just admitted in another part of this thread, I don't think I'd have had the gumption to tackle a re-write if you hadn't, either, so this is a circular dependency. :) > I don't think we need a 'Does everything look correct' requester. The reason that it's there, and I disliked it too when I first thought about it, is that since the partitions are not created until the very end, you don't get the nice /dev/sd0s1f type of device names since the label editor doesn't know this until it creates the chunks with libdisk. The reason it doesn't create them initially is because everything except the manually created filesystems are done "speculatively" since it would be very expensive to create and delete chunks when shuffling between profiles, and libdisk is also fragile enough that I'd sort of expect that to break if you did it enough times. So I thought the user might like the chance to actually see the final layout before proceeding, and if I just exit the screen immediately on (Q)uit, you'd never see it. Perhaps that's just fine though. What do folks think? > If you haven't already, each profile needs to have a small paragraph > associated with it documenting what it is designed to do. Then as you Not a paragraph, but a single line, yes. It's displayed at the bottom of the screen whenever auto mode is invoked or the profile is switched. > The buddy idea is kind of silly. The ability of one partition to inherit > the space freed up by another is based on whether the partition is > adjacent to the other, not whether it's the other's buddy. Well, I thought that too initially, but the problem is that things aren't always adjacent in ways that make sense. You would probably want to collapse /usr or /var into /, for example, if either were deleted since it's fairly obvious that the user's headed in the direction of "one big root" if they're doing that (and whether or not that's a good idea is immaterial, some people just prefer it). In the traditional view, however, it's /, /usr and /var. Under your scenario, deleting /var would collapse its space into /usr! - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44607.1008027292>