Le ven 25/07/2003 à 01:45, Kevin Freeman a écrit : > Ethan Bonick wrote: > >>Jeremy Portzer wrote: > >> > >> > >>>But you have to be realistic about configuration tools. If you are > >>>looking for a vast increase in the number of options, and thus the > >>>complexity, of basic things like filesystems, there will be an > >>>exponential increase in the codebase necessary for configuration > >>>tools. There are only limited resources available. As linuxconf > >>>demonstrated, you have to be REALLY good at writing configuration > >>>tools, or you end up with a big mess. > >> > >>Have you looked at anaconda code? It _already_ contains code to handle > >>the requested filesystems, unless it was recently ripped out. The GUI > >>just hides that fact from the end user. > >> > > > > > > Why bother putting it in if you are going to hide it? > > > > Now that is the $6 million question. From past responses I gather that > the reason is that Red Hat utterly despises everything except ext2/3. > And now they have even stopped including kernel modules for the other > filesystems on the install CDs, making the "workaround" even harder. Bugzilla. > What once required a simple "linux reiserfs" at the boot prompt now > requires 2 more steps: build a new boot kernel with needed fs modules, > and build a new boot CD containing the newly-built kernel. I wonder how > many users will switch to other distros rather than taking the > opportunity to learn how to build a custom install CD? > > ... but I'm not bitter ... OK, maybe just a little. :) > > Kevin > > > -- > Rhl-beta-list mailing list > Rhl-beta-list redhat com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhl-beta-list -- Féliciano Matias <feliciano matias free fr>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message=?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=