Subject: Re: Rototil of sysinst partitioning code
To: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@tensor.3miasto.net>
From: Greywolf <greywolf@starwolf.com>
List: current-users
Date: 06/05/2003 12:05:53
Thus spake Wojciech Puchar ("WP> ") sometime Today...

WP> no partitions, no problems!

Whatever.  I'll pick recoverability over brainless installation any
day of the week.  I still recommend that if one is going to do such
a scheme, especially on a server, go use an OS which caters to lack
of forethought.  Putting everything on a 20G root partition shows a
tendency not to want to administrate a system which, while somewhat
understandable, is not a trait *I* would choose were I in the place
of hiring someone to administrate my systems.

It's up to the individual, of course, and I can see where / and
/usr make a good merge now (but don't enforce it, please, by
doing something stupid like making dependencies on /usr being
mounted in single-user mode!), but I still think having anything
user-writable on / is a bad idea.  Old habits die hard, I guess.

[We reallly ought to give some thought to keeping system logs
 on a non-user-writable partition, too.]

And, from my experience, trying to figure out what goes where
on Linux is a f(rea)king nightmare.  It's enough to confuse someone
into having EVERYTHING on /.  We've covered this before WRT / and /usr,
split, and /usr split from /usr/local.  FS organization is, to some of
us, a good thing.  I think it should be promoted by default.  At install
time one is always free to repartition the filesystems as they see fit,
and it's MUCH easier to rip out existing data and consolidate than it
is to come up with a partition scheme from scratch (chaos and destruction
are much easier than order and construction).

I find it rather amusing, actually, that, David, you've decided to
rototill sysinst because I've been making notes in that direction
of late and trying to figure the best approach.  You beat me to it,
and I don't wish to seem unappreciative.  Getting installers right
is non-trivial, so thank you for taking it on.

My thought of procedures would have been:
	[do any pre-setup such as term type &c.]
	- determine which disk(s) you're actually going to use
	- determine what you're going to install of the system
	- determine if you're going to preserve anything
	- partition and newfs the disk(s) as needed
	- proceed with the rest of the installation (system name,
	  pkg location (ftp, net, &c.), timezone, all that good stuff).

Does this seem out of line?

				--*greywolf;
--
NetBSD: We're not in canvas anymore, toto