On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 09:36:15PM -0600, dann frazier wrote: > > I'd appreciate if someone more partman knowledgable than I could > take a look at the patch; if it looks reasonable to such a person, > I'll be happy to commit these changes and do an upload.
Unfortunately you based your package on partman-palo which is completely untested. partman-newworld receives much better support. You can remove the README file as it is not correct (both for partman-efi and partman-palo). Only the first sentence in it is correct. The most important difference between partman-efi and partman-newworld seams to be that partman-efi always creates a fresh FAT16 file system and partman-newworld never creates hfs file system. Consider the differences in update.d between partman-palo and partman-newworld. I don't know which is more appropriate for you. There is a big difference in valid_filesystems between partman-efi and partman-newworld (and in partman-palo there is no such a directory). I am not sure, but it seams to me that the approach in partman-newworld for valid_filesystems is right. I have one question: it seams that EFI partition = FAT16 partition with bootable flag set. Does this mean that in principle the users should be able to create EFI partition without partman-efi? Anton Zinoviev -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
