[SM-Discuss] lvm and device-mapper
eric at sandall.us
Mon Nov 10 22:38:23 EST 2008
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:18:16 -0600
Jeremy Blosser <jblosser-smgl at firinn.org> wrote:
> On Nov 10, Eric Sandall [eric at sandall.us] wrote:
> > I like this approach best. :) Otherwise I'd say #2 or #1, in that
> > order.
> Upstream has decided a package "device-mapper" no longer exists. Why
> should we create (and maintain) one?
Because I don't want the complexity of one spell providing, optionally,
device-mapper and/or lvm. I like the core packages to be simple. :)
> #2 is one of the worst IMO, it's completely off track with upstream.
Sometimes upstream is stupid. :) However, I'd go for #1 if no one likes
#2. I liked #2 because it keeps our setup the same, users won't notice,
and we cut down on downloads by one source (granted, both are included
in one tarball).
Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric at sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/ | http://counter.li.org/ #196285
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/sm-discuss/attachments/20081110/2051814d/attachment.bin
More information about the SM-Discuss