On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > But I'm not talking about it for users like you and I. > I've said over and over in this thread about regular users and you seem > to be missing that part; it's the entirety of everything I'm saying > here. I didn't say LVM shouldn't be available, I said that installers > shouldn't put it up front and centre in the user's face claiming that > it's awesome. > > Your average user has no idea what volume management even is and are > completely lost when it comes up. They just have no mental image of what > it even could be and a tool that is not understood and not used is not > worth installing. >
And yet most Ubuntu users who have no idea what volume management are running just fine with it all the same, and at some point if they ever need to move things around it will make life that much easier for them. The fact that they've had no issues running this as their default configuration demonstrates that it isn't unsuitable for "regular users." I'm well aware of the argument you're making. I simply disagree with it, as apparently do the maintainers of Ubuntu and the businessmen making money off of it. Decisions on a commercially-backed distro generally don't come down to the whim of one person, at least not if they actually cause problems. As far as symlinks go - they're a royal pain in the rear as they force you to micromanage what ends up on which disk, and then when your convoluted rat's nest of symlinks starts to become a problem it becomes that much harder to fix it. Symlinks and mountpoints used to be the only tool in the toolbox, and to this day half of your OS is in /usr and half isn't as a result. :) Volume management is a best practice, and it is right for Ubuntu to make it a default for those who don't understand the pros and virtually non-existant cons. -- Rich
