- From: Joe Zeff <joe@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2012 12:44:32 -0800
On 03/04/2012 12:17 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 04.03.2012 21:13, schrieb Peter Larsen:>> Only on systems that are dual-booted does
> partitions make sense. With Grub2 we can now have a single partition for
> everything - and the reason we have the partition table is due to the
> bios needs during boot.
is this a joke?
No. I think that Mr. Larsen simply misunderstood, or generalized too far. Nothing except (maybe) Windows cares about partition types or the boot flag, and starting from there he landed on the Island of Conclusions and decided that that meant that if you're not dual booting, you don't ever need multiple partitions.
I know -- Oh Ghod, how well I know! -- how easy it is to forget that most people don't have decades of computer experience and that things that are intuitively obvious to those of us who do are sometimes incomprehensible to the less experienced. And, of course, the requirements of those of us using Linux only at home aren't the same as for those using it professionally, especially when it comes to backups and security. Still, it's good to have some insight from the professional side if only to show us how different the two environments are and what we'd have to take into account if we were using Linux to run even a small business.
users mailing list
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
- Re: lvm
- From: Peter Larsen
- Re: lvm
- Prev by Date: is fedora really bleeding edge?
- Next by Date: Re: lvm
- Previous by thread: Re: lvm
- Next by thread: Re: lvm