Hi all, On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 08:14:09PM +0200, David Härdeman wrote: > Looking at the above mentioned comparison, there are three differences: > > 1) The templates used > This can be taken care of with a parameter as you mentioned
1.5) The priorities at which some templates are asked (high vs. critical). One example is $package/confirm_nochanges - it is high in partman-base and -md but critical in -crypto and -lvm. I'm not sure this difference is intentional/meaningful though? > 2) Additional comments in partman-base > Not relevant > > 3) Additional detection of previously formatted partitions > Looking at this difference, it seems like a feature that should > be made available in a general version of the function. > > I've attached a patch which merges the four implementations into one > while taking the above comments into consideration. The result is a net > reduction of a bit less than 300 lines of code. Very nice improvement, IMHO. I looked into doing this consolidation some time back and came to the same conclusion with regard to the differences, so you may consider this a +1 on your findings and the patch :-) cheers, Max -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
