[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: partition resizing (was: Re: PedUnit API commit)
From: |
Szakacsits Szabolcs |
Subject: |
Re: partition resizing (was: Re: PedUnit API commit) |
Date: |
Fri, 8 Jul 2005 14:14:46 +0200 (MEST) |
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
>
> BTW, I think I prefer the new 'fitpart' against extending 'resize'
> semantics. Simpler, clearer.
'Fitpart' is ok only for shrinkage, not for enlargement. 'Check' isn't ok
for the same reason. Apparently only 'resize' make sense, using extended
semantics. Pity. Of course alternatives aren't exclusive.
Here is an additional suggestion. Using
resize partition
could make 'fitpart'. Basically this is what filesystem resizers do if no
size is given: they adjust the filesystem to the partition size. Parted
could do the same but from the partitioner side: adjusts the partition to
the filesystem size.
Szaka
- Re: PedUnit API commit, Michael Reed, 2005/07/01
- Re: PedUnit API commit, leslie . polzer, 2005/07/01
- Re: PedUnit API commit, Michael Reed, 2005/07/01
- Re: PedUnit API commit, leslie . polzer, 2005/07/02
- Re: PedUnit API commit, Michael Reed, 2005/07/06
- Re: PedUnit API commit, leslie . polzer, 2005/07/06
- Re: PedUnit API commit, Andrew Clausen, 2005/07/06
- Re: partition resizing (was: Re: PedUnit API commit), Szakacsits Szabolcs, 2005/07/07
- Re: partition resizing (was: Re: PedUnit API commit), Andrew Clausen, 2005/07/08
- Re: partition resizing (was: Re: PedUnit API commit), Szakacsits Szabolcs, 2005/07/08
- Re: partition resizing (was: Re: PedUnit API commit),
Szakacsits Szabolcs <=
- Re: PedUnit API commit and partition resizing (blending "Re: PedUnit API commit" and "Re: partition resizing"), Michael Reed, 2005/07/08