Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try

On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 03:33:59PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> I'm not sure that configurations requiring more than 15 partitions are 
> properly described as "trivial." Which is not to disagree with your 
> point about required user tools, but most systems needing such tools 
> will be large and complex enough that a userspace solution will be 
> acceptable.

And there is LVM too, which seems better than partitions in many cases.

--
Len Sorensen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [code] Unlimited partitions, a try
    • From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
  • Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try
    • From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
  • Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try
    • From: Bill Davidsen <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [RFC PATCH RT] push waiting rt tasks to cpus with lower prios.
• Next by Date: Re: [RFC PATCH RT] push waiting rt tasks to cpus with lower prios.
• Previous by thread: Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try
• Next by thread: Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]