Re: Questions, additions, and ideas.

[Harley D. Eades III]

Sven Luther <address@hidden> writes:

> On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 03:46:56PM -0600, address@hidden wrote:
> > > Sure, that is what debian-installer's partman does. I still think a proper
> > > fix in libparted itself would be better though.
> > I see what you mean.  That might be little tricky. :)
> 
> Well, there may be at least two ways to do it, either have libparted do the
> two way writing, or fixing it for real in the kernel.
I am going to look into disk_duplicate ().

> > > > As far as the "undo" command working when the interface loads we load a
> > > disk
> > > > struct and modify it.  See the partition table on disk has not changed 
> > > > so
> > > if the
> > > > user feels like they have made some kind of mistake and issues a "undo"
> > > then we
> > > > dump the current struct and reread from disk.(Because the disk has not 
> > > > be
> > > > altered. If I am misunderstanding please correct me.
> > > 
> > > How do you handle stepwise undo ? you copy the in-memory structure for all
> > > steps ? 
> > I have not thought of that.  I will try and think of something you have any 
> > ideas?
> 
> Well, coming from a functional programing background, i would say if all the
> tables where pass by value one, you just would have to keep a stack of them,
> and pop them when doing undo.
> This is not possible in libparted's design, but you could emulate it by
> keeping a stack of copied structures, maybe ? I don't see how you could do it
> otherwise.
Hmm maybe will work, I am going to start some test to see if we can get 
something working.

Cheers
hde