Re: Source missing and project dead?

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

[Andrew Clausen]
> Hi Petter,

Hi.  Good to see activity in the project. :)

> I have been very busy during the year with my studies.  I expect to
> be less busy in 2004.  My studies won't involve writing programs - or
> much computer science in general, so working with Parted will probably
> be more attractive to me anyway.

Sounds good for the future of parted.

> I have spent a fair bit of time trying to resolve the ftp.gnu.org
> issues - but not enough to actually resolve them :/ Security
> problems are nasty.  It would be helpful if there were some more
> hand-holding...  (I'm been having problems using gpg, and haven't
> had enough time to figure it out on my own).

Let me know if I can assist.  I am not very good at using gpg either,
but have been able to both generate and sign keys, as well as sending
and receiving encrypted emails. :)

> Parted's ext2 support is very time consuming to maintain.  It really
> should just use e2fsprogs.  Then there's the reiserfs and hfs
> patches to integrate, amiga table support...
> (While "fringe" stuff might not seem important, it can be for
> multi-platform distribitions trying to have a common installer,
> etc.)


Yes, I work on the debian installer, and agree that the "fridge"
support should be included as well. :)

> In general, I think Parted needs a big time investment to get it
> back on track.  I guess this would be worth it...

What about making parted a project on Savannah (or alioth.debian.org),
and try to put together a group to maintain it?  I will not be part of
that group, I am already involved in too many projects, but find it a
good way to develop projects like this. :)

> Why does anyone use (lib)parted instead of EVMS?  Is it better to
> spend the time to add missing features to EVMS?  I think it would be
> helpful for both Parted and EVMS people to know ;)

I do not know much about EVMS, but didn't think EVMS was able to
create partitions, only logical volumes.  Also, EVMS is not supported
by default kernels, so I use LVM instead.  I look forward to kernel
2.6, where LVM2 and EVMS should be able to use the same kernel
implementation. :)