This reminds me of: http://bash.org/?152037
]]>I am surprised to see a separate /boot partition in ext2!
What for???
It adds some useless complexity.
It lacks the ability to mount safely a saved /home partition without taking the risk of formatting it by mistake.
It is much more important then a ext2 /boot separate partition!
Most of the community uses lilo by default: I would suggest to stick with the majority.
It has already the Slackware look.
Why not put also the functionnality.
It's been working well for years and it is safe/straightforward to use
dude, seriously, I'm totally confused. What's your point? ext2 is used because the kernel doesn't need journaling (if you want to use a different FS, go on, be my guest, nobody's stopping you), /boot is in a different partition because 1) Once the kernel is compiled, you have no reason whatsoever to touch it. 2) If your root partition gets corrupted, your kernel is safe.
As for the /home - /boot correlation.. huh?
Lilo WAS used by the majority, most distro's come with GRUB these days. If you want Lllo, feel free to install & use it. Oh, and please show me some statistics to backup your statement.
PS: Do your own partitioning scheme.
]]>On the other hand imo auto-prepare is ment for newbies. Users that have an existing /home partition should know enough to skip the auto-prepare and set things up the way they want.
For the record : i also use grub on 3 systems.
]]>The idea behind it is that ext2 is "more compatible" than ext3. Although ext3 can be mounted transparently as ext2, bootloaders are fussy. Anyway, for a secure system, the /boot partition shouldn't be mounted rw unless changes are being made to it, so you don't ever have to worry about data corruption from power loss, etc. So yeah, basically it doesn't matter. ext2 is a perfectly safe partition.
It lacks the ability to mount safely a saved /home partition without taking the risk of formatting it by mistake.
How on earth did you manage that? There is an amazing system in place to stop this happening, look:
To mount the partition: mount /home
To format the partition: mke2fs /dev/[node]
Clever, ain't it...
And for the record: I'm a grub user myself.
]]>You are not forced to have a separate /boot partition, you can define all the partition you like. You can also mount a preexisting partition as /home without formatting it, you are explicitly asked if you want to format any partition you mount. It is quite obvious that this option is not allowed if you choose the default partitioning, but the manual selection is really simple.
]]>:?
Exactly.
Jayhel: who died and made you Einstein?
Most of the community uses lilo by default: I would suggest to stick with the majority.
Where in God's name did you pull that statistic from? Making blinded statements like that is just pure ignorance. :!:
]]>I am not totally sure about this but I think that it is easier to setup grub with an ext2 partition. I haven't tried it in any other way. If you are going to use a precompiled kernel you will probably see that grub is a better alternative (there are no hooks in pacman which runs lilo after a kernel update).
Which community? Linux or Arch? I would like to see some numbers. I don't think that the majority of the Arch community are lilo users.
There is already a thread which is about improving the installer.
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=24321
I am surprised to see a separate /boot partition in ext2!
What for???
It adds some useless complexity.
It lacks the ability to mount safely a saved /home partition without taking the risk of formatting it by mistake.
It is much more important then a ext2 /boot separate partition!
Most of the community uses lilo by default: I would suggest to stick with the majority.
It has already the Slackware look.
Why not put also the functionnality.
It's been working well for years and it is safe/straightforward to use
:?
]]>