> I said that I cannot imagine a case where "I would want all partitions > on all disk drives to be removed during an OS install". Despite your > claims, I still would never want all partitions on all disk drives to be > removed during an OS install. Not for the two cases that you provided > (#2 of which is true for me all of the time, by the way), nor for any > case.
I won't make this a long e-mail - this thread has gone on long enough. But I will tell you a case where I love the fact Kickstart will kill everything. Unattended installs - exactly what I think Kickstart was designed for. It can't be very unattended if I have to stand there and do the old 'Are you sure', 'Are you really sure', 'Last chance now', dialogs. You set up Kickstart to a system of your liking, then take it, plonk it in a PC you want to install, press the button, and make a coffee. When you come back, the system should be ready to go as you wanted it. Period. I build quite a few systems a week, and I'm very happy with the automated installation stuff that's available. It means I can set up about 4 PCs at a time instead of one at a time. If the customer want's data off it, I back it up to network, then restore when finished. Same thing everybody should do. Never rely on data to be there after a major install. No backups is a bad practice to get in to. Hey, it MAY not suit every purpose, and obviously not in your case, but please don't get into a 'right' or 'wrong' flame war. There is no right or wrong here, but mainly opinion. Kickstart was written by people who want nothing for their efforts. If you want it to behave differently, sign up to their project and make a difference. I really think it's wrong a tradesman blaming tools for a botched job. Don't you? Regards, --- Edward Dekkers (Director) Triple D Computer Services P/L -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
