On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:40:54 +0100, "dennis@home"

<dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>

>"Peter Köhlmann" . wrote in message

>news:ffadbr$26q$02$1@news.t-online.com...

>

>>

>> He is correct in everything he posted. The one completely incorrect is the

>> OP (a troll) and you. Naturally you. You have yet to post something which

>> contains anything correct. Until now all your posts were idiotic rubbish

>

>

>Hi.

>I don't usually call people liars but in your case its obviously so.

 

Let me make it crystal clear. You have ONE big problem Dennis. You

think your sh*t don't stink. I assure it does. Get off your high horse

and stop pretending to be something you are not. Your experience and

knowledge based on what you posted so far is well, bush league at

best. Worse, you simply refuse to ever admit you're wrong when you

clearly are and you have been wrong many times. So you are seen as

just another pompous windbag. That doesn't make you stand out, because

we already have many pompous windbags posting here. So sorry, you're

nothing special, just one of many dopes that seem to enjoy making a

fool of themselves over and over.

Adam Albright wrote:

>

>

> Let me make it crystal clear.

 

You couldn't make air seem crystal clear you fukkin loser.

 

You have ONE big problem Dennis. You

> think your sh*t don't stink.

 

No, you're the one who thinks his sh*t don't stink.

 

I assure it does. Get off your high horse

> and stop pretending to be something you are not.

 

You're the great pretender...mr genius...mr computer expert...hahaha.

 

Your experience and

> knowledge based on what you posted so far is well, bush league at

> best.

 

 

Oh, tell us all about your great computer experience...especially the

part where you can't get even one little install of Vista business to

run correctly.

 

Worse, you simply refuse to ever admit you're wrong when you

> clearly are and you have been wrong many times.

 

Oh no! That's your area of expertise. According to you, you've never

been wrong...you fukkin moron.

 

So you are seen as

> just another pompous windbag.

 

You are so good at "projecting" your character flaws an psychosis onto

others medical researchers should make you their case study.

 

That doesn't make you stand out, because

> we already have many pompous windbags posting here.

 

Only one like you...the real one.

 

So sorry, you're

> nothing special,

 

Oh and you are?

 

just one of many dopes that seem to enjoy making a

> fool of themselves over and over.

 

FUKK!!! You're the biggest fool of all.

Frank

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 07:13:20 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message

> news:13hd1p0q7uk3u6d@news.supernews.com...

>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:12:58 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>>

>>> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message

>>> news:13hctdt2i2nmaa5@news.supernews.com...

>>>

>>> 8<

>>>

>>>> Linux does not tend to delete users data.

>>>

>>> This thread is about Linux deleting a users data.

>>>

>>> 8<

>>

>> Linux didn't delete the user's data.. by itself. The user explicitly

>> told the installer to wipe out the data.

>

> Yes we all know that.

> What is being disscussed is if the warning messages are suitable for the

> intended target users as he didn't understand. If Linux is intended for

> people that are computer literate then they are OK and most such users

> will only make the odd mistake and will have backupos anyway.

> If Linux is going to be installable by the majority of users then I

> don't think the messages or install routine are much good.

 

Well then, you are saying that Linux is no good for the majority of users

because the installer is no good, right? Because they can't install it

right?

 

Well I suppose I can see how much more detailed the windows partition

step is.

 

http://hevnikov.com/img/061223-install-vista.png

 

Really descriptive!! The majority of users are REALLY going to know

what's going on here! I mean seriously, it couldn't be more clear.

 

And look!!! The warning message!!

 

http://www.zdnet.com.au/shared/images/insight/vista/11-vista.jpg

 

Wait a moment? Microsoft is using the word DATA?!?!

 

So if I now go by your rules which you are applying to the Linux

installer, the windows installer (by your rules) is equally unsuitable

for the masses. Which if I continue to go by your rules, makes installing

Windows equally unsuitable for the masses.

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message

news:CeydncpTEMK1Y4XanZ2dnUVZ8qPinZ2d@giganews.com...

> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 07:13:20 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>

>> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message

>> news:13hd1p0q7uk3u6d@news.supernews.com...

>>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:12:58 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>>>

>>>> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message

>>>> news:13hctdt2i2nmaa5@news.supernews.com...

>>>>

>>>> 8<

>>>>

>>>>> Linux does not tend to delete users data.

>>>>

>>>> This thread is about Linux deleting a users data.

>>>>

>>>> 8<

>>>

>>> Linux didn't delete the user's data.. by itself. The user explicitly

>>> told the installer to wipe out the data.

>>

>> Yes we all know that.

>> What is being disscussed is if the warning messages are suitable for the

>> intended target users as he didn't understand. If Linux is intended for

>> people that are computer literate then they are OK and most such users

>> will only make the odd mistake and will have backupos anyway.

>> If Linux is going to be installable by the majority of users then I

>> don't think the messages or install routine are much good.

>

> Well then, you are saying that Linux is no good for the majority of users

> because the installer is no good, right? Because they can't install it

> right?

>

> Well I suppose I can see how much more detailed the windows partition

> step is.

>

> http://hevnikov.com/img/061223-install-vista.png

>

> Really descriptive!! The majority of users are REALLY going to know

> what's going on here! I mean seriously, it couldn't be more clear.

>

> And look!!! The warning message!!

>

> http://www.zdnet.com.au/shared/images/insight/vista/11-vista.jpg

>

> Wait a moment? Microsoft is using the word DATA?!?!

>

> So if I now go by your rules which you are applying to the Linux

> installer, the windows installer (by your rules) is equally unsuitable

> for the masses. Which if I continue to go by your rules, makes installing

> Windows equally unsuitable for the masses.

 

Why does a discussion about Linux always end up with a Linux is better than

windows debate?

 

I agree that it could be easier to install windows.

 

However you have to select a partition and then choose to install it using

*advanced* options before you can format or delete it.

A user in normal mode doesn't get the options to delete or format partitions

and installing vista to an existing partition doesn't destroy data.

 

Compare that to Ubuntu where you typically get three tick boxes

 

A: use entire disk

B: use free space

C: do it manually

 

Now if you choose either A or B you get the /same/ warning message just

before it commits the changes (at least on a single disk machine).

 

A will delete your data and B will not.. do you not see that it is just

wrong.

dennis@home wrote:

> The fact that I can't show the warning is just evidence that it doesn't

> exist.

 

That's some real clear thinking, dumbshit@home.

> You really should try and get the logic correct before demanding evidence.

 

Irony meter (..../)

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:34:49 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

> "Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message

> news:CeydncpTEMK1Y4XanZ2dnUVZ8qPinZ2d@giganews.com...

>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 07:13:20 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>>

>>> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message

>>> news:13hd1p0q7uk3u6d@news.supernews.com...

>>>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:12:58 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> "Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message

>>>>> news:13hctdt2i2nmaa5@news.supernews.com...

>>>>>

>>>>> 8<

>>>>>

>>>>>> Linux does not tend to delete users data.

>>>>>

>>>>> This thread is about Linux deleting a users data.

>>>>>

>>>>> 8<

>>>>

>>>> Linux didn't delete the user's data.. by itself. The user explicitly

>>>> told the installer to wipe out the data.

>>>

>>> Yes we all know that.

>>> What is being disscussed is if the warning messages are suitable for

>>> the intended target users as he didn't understand. If Linux is

>>> intended for people that are computer literate then they are OK and

>>> most such users will only make the odd mistake and will have backupos

>>> anyway. If Linux is going to be installable by the majority of users

>>> then I don't think the messages or install routine are much good.

>>

>> Well then, you are saying that Linux is no good for the majority of

>> users because the installer is no good, right? Because they can't

>> install it right?

>>

>> Well I suppose I can see how much more detailed the windows partition

>> step is.

>>

>> http://hevnikov.com/img/061223-install-vista.png

>>

>> Really descriptive!! The majority of users are REALLY going to know

>> what's going on here! I mean seriously, it couldn't be more clear.

>>

>> And look!!! The warning message!!

>>

>> http://www.zdnet.com.au/shared/images/insight/vista/11-vista.jpg

>>

>> Wait a moment? Microsoft is using the word DATA?!?!

>>

>> So if I now go by your rules which you are applying to the Linux

>> installer, the windows installer (by your rules) is equally unsuitable

>> for the masses. Which if I continue to go by your rules, makes

>> installing Windows equally unsuitable for the masses.

>

> Why does a discussion about Linux always end up with a Linux is better

> than windows debate?

 

I didn't say one is better than the other. I simply applied the rules you

apply to the Ubuntu installer to the Windows installer.

>

> I agree that it could be easier to install windows.

>

> However you have to select a partition and then choose to install it

> using *advanced* options before you can format or delete it. A user in

> normal mode doesn't get the options to delete or format partitions and

> installing vista to an existing partition doesn't destroy data.

 

If, and only if, said partition is an NTFS partition. What if it is an

Ext3 Linux partition? Seeing how Vista can't be installed on Ext3, this

would destroy the data on the Ext3 partition!

 

Or even better, what if it's a FAT32 partition? Vista can't be installed

on a FAT32 partition either. So there too would be data loss.

>

> Compare that to Ubuntu where you typically get three tick boxes

>

> A: use entire disk

> B: use free space

> C: do it manually

>

> Now if you choose either A or B you get the /same/ warning message just

> before it commits the changes (at least on a single disk machine).

 

The number of disks is irrelevant and Option C will also give you a

warning at the end.

>

> A will delete your data and B will not.. do you not see that it is just

> wrong.

 

No, I have the intelligence to understand that if I choose my entire disk

then this means the entire disk and that if I choose free space then this

means free space.

 

I also have the intelligence to not make changes that I know are liable

to affect my entire computer until I understand what the consequences are

or might be of said changes.

 

I wasn't trying to get into OS A is better than OS B. I know which is

better for me and everyone else needs to decide on their own what choice

is better for them. It's pointless arguing that.

 

The only thing I am trying to get to is that there is no significant

difference between the Windows and Ubuntu install mechanism. And that,

regardless of the OS, a user needs to know what it is they are doing and

how it will affect their system before they do it.

 

It's equally easy to screw up a system using either installer if someone

doesn't know what they are doing. This is especially true if they

haven't created a dedicated hard drive or partition for a second OS if

they choose to dual boot. And if they don't know how to do that and don't

understand the terms "disk", "whole", "entire", "all data", "partition",

"everything", then they should probably let a professional technician

fluent in English handle it.

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message

news:pan.2007.10.19.19.58.23.526860@nospam.invalid...

> dennis@home wrote:

>

>> The fact that I can't show the warning is just evidence that it doesn't

>> exist.

>

> That's some real clear thinking, dumbshit@home.

>

>> You really should try and get the logic correct before demanding

>> evidence.

>

> Irony meter (..../)

>

>

 

If you are so sure my logic is wrong why don't you explain where?

If you don't I will just assume you are as dumb as you sound and pop you

back.

"dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

 

>"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

 

>8<

>Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant.

>Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing I

>notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if I select use

>the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>>>>>>>>>

>The partition tables of the following devices are changed:

>SCSI1 (0,0,0)(sda)

>The following partitions are going to be formatted:

>partition #1 of SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3

>partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

><<<<<<<<<

>For use entire disk

>and

>>>>>>>>>>>

>The partition tables of the following devices are changed:

>SCSI1 (0,0,0)(sda)

>The following partitions are going to be formatted:

>partition #1 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3

>partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

><<<<<<<<<<<

 

>For use largest free space.

 

>One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.

>Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?

 

 

The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions were

created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your Win partition,

the ball game is over.

The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to use the

whole disk.

"Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>

>

>>"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>

>

>>8<

>

>>Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant.

>

>>Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing I

>>notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if I select

>>use

>>the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed:

>>SCSI1 (0,0,0)(sda)

>

>>The following partitions are going to be formatted:

>>partition #1 of SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3

>>partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>><<<<<<<<<

>

>>For use entire disk

>

>>and

>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed:

>>SCSI1 (0,0,0)(sda)

>

>>The following partitions are going to be formatted:

>>partition #1 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3

>>partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>

>><<<<<<<<<<<

>

>

>>For use largest free space.

>

>

>>One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.

>

>>Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?

>

>

> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions were

> created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your Win partition,

> the ball game is over.

> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to use the

> whole disk.

>

>

As they are the warnings they are the problem.

There may be a need for more warnings or just a better partitioner but that

is an addition.

On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 20:22:23 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

> news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>

>>

>>>"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>

>>

>>>8<

>>

>>>Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant.

>>

>>>Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing I

>>>notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if I

>>>select use

>>>the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>>

>>

>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>(0,0,0)(sda)

>>

>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>><<<<<<<<<

>>

>>>For use entire disk

>>

>>>and

>>

>>

>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>(0,0,0)(sda)

>>

>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>

>>><<<<<<<<<<<

>>

>>

>>>For use largest free space.

>>

>>

>>>One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.

>>

>>>Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?

>>

>>

>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions were

>> created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your Win

>> partition, the ball game is over.

>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to use the

>> whole disk.

>>

>>

> As they are the warnings they are the problem. There may be a need for

> more warnings or just a better partitioner but that is an addition.

 

... or maybe if you don't know why you are partitioning, you shouldn't.

 

 

 

--

Rick

"dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

 

>"Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>

>>

>>>"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>

>>

>>>8<

>>

>>>Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant.

>>

>>>Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing I

>>>notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if I select

>>>use

>>>the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed:

>>>SCSI1 (0,0,0)(sda)

>>

>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted:

>>>partition #1 of SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3

>>>partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>><<<<<<<<<

>>

>>>For use entire disk

>>

>>>and

>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed:

>>>SCSI1 (0,0,0)(sda)

>>

>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted:

>>>partition #1 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3

>>>partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>

>>><<<<<<<<<<<

>>

>>

>>>For use largest free space.

>>

>>

>>>One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.

>>

>>>Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?

>>

>>

>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions were

>> created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your Win partition,

>> the ball game is over.

>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to use the

>> whole disk.

>>

>>

>As they are the warnings they are the problem.

>There may be a need for more warnings or just a better partitioner but that

>is an addition.

 

No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win partition

is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is irrelevant. It was

the repartitioning that destroyed the windows data. (Yes, I know that the

data is still there and that IF you managed to repartition the disk again

to exactly the same as it was before, you could recover the data, but that

is largely irrelevant to almost all users. It is the partitioning that

destroys the ability to access the data). Thus if there is no warning on

the repartitioning then that is where the problem lies.

"Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...

> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>

>

>>"Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>

>>>

>>>>"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>>news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>>

>>>

>>>>8<

>>>

>>>>Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant.

>>>

>>>>Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing I

>>>>notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if I select

>>>>use

>>>>the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed:

>>>>SCSI1 (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>

>>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted:

>>>>partition #1 of SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3

>>>>partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>><<<<<<<<<

>>>

>>>>For use entire disk

>>>

>>>>and

>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed:

>>>>SCSI1 (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>

>>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted:

>>>>partition #1 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3

>>>>partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>

>>>><<<<<<<<<<<

>>>

>>>

>>>>For use largest free space.

>>>

>>>

>>>>One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.

>>>

>>>>Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?

>>>

>>>

>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions were

>>> created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your Win partition,

>>> the ball game is over.

>>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to use the

>>> whole disk.

>>>

>>>

>>As they are the warnings they are the problem.

>>There may be a need for more warnings or just a better partitioner but

>>that

>>is an addition.

>

> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win partition

> is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is irrelevant. It was

> the repartitioning that destroyed the windows data. (Yes, I know that the

> data is still there and that IF you managed to repartition the disk again

> to exactly the same as it was before, you could recover the data, but that

> is largely irrelevant to almost all users. It is the partitioning that

> destroys the ability to access the data). Thus if there is no warning on

> the repartitioning then that is where the problem lies.

>

>

 

Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few more questions and then

applies the changes.

It is at the point just before it applies the changes that it puts up the

warning about destroying data.

If you abort no changes are made (or none are supposed to be made, I have

not checked myself).

Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the majority of users and in

the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.

On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:21:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

> news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...

>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>

>>

>>>"Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>>>news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>8<

>>>>

>>>>>Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant.

>>>>

>>>>>Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing

>>>>>I notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if I

>>>>>select use

>>>>>the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>(0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>

>>>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>><<<<<<<<<

>>>>

>>>>>For use entire disk

>>>>

>>>>>and

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>(0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>

>>>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>

>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>For use largest free space.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.

>>>>

>>>>>Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions were

>>>> created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your Win

>>>> partition, the ball game is over.

>>>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to use

>>>> the whole disk.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>As they are the warnings they are the problem. There may be a need for

>>>more warnings or just a better partitioner but that

>>>is an addition.

>>

>> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win

>> partition is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is

>> irrelevant. It was the repartitioning that destroyed the windows data.

>> (Yes, I know that the data is still there and that IF you managed to

>> repartition the disk again to exactly the same as it was before, you

>> could recover the data, but that is largely irrelevant to almost all

>> users. It is the partitioning that destroys the ability to access the

>> data). Thus if there is no warning on the repartitioning then that is

>> where the problem lies.

>>

>>

>>

> Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few more questions and

> then applies the changes.

 

No, the user applies the changes.

> It is at the point just before it applies the changes that it puts up

> the warning about destroying data.

> If you abort no changes are made (or none are supposed to be made, I

> have not checked myself).

> Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the majority of users and

> in the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.

 

Then maybe those users should not be installing operating systems.

 

--

Rick

Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:

>On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:21:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>> news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...

>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>

>>>

>>>>"Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>>>>news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>8<

>>>>>

>>>>>>Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant.

>>>>>

>>>>>>Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing

>>>>>>I notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if I

>>>>>>select use

>>>>>>the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>(0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>

>>>>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>>SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>>><<<<<<<<<

>>>>>

>>>>>>For use entire disk

>>>>>

>>>>>>and

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>(0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>

>>>>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>>SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>>

>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>For use largest free space.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.

>>>>>

>>>>>>Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions were

>>>>> created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your Win

>>>>> partition, the ball game is over.

>>>>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to use

>>>>> the whole disk.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>As they are the warnings they are the problem. There may be a need for

>>>>more warnings or just a better partitioner but that

>>>>is an addition.

>>>

>>> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win

>>> partition is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is

>>> irrelevant. It was the repartitioning that destroyed the windows data.

>>> (Yes, I know that the data is still there and that IF you managed to

>>> repartition the disk again to exactly the same as it was before, you

>>> could recover the data, but that is largely irrelevant to almost all

>>> users. It is the partitioning that destroys the ability to access the

>>> data). Thus if there is no warning on the repartitioning then that is

>>> where the problem lies.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>> Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few more questions and

>> then applies the changes.

>No, the user applies the changes.

>> It is at the point just before it applies the changes that it puts up

>> the warning about destroying data.

>> If you abort no changes are made (or none are supposed to be made, I

>> have not checked myself).

>> Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the majority of users and

>> in the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.

>Then maybe those users should not be installing operating systems.

 

Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users. It is (almost) impossible to

find Linux preinstalled. Thus the installation routing needs to be set up

to allow installation by users. If the installer does not give adequate

warning that things are going to be destroyed, it is the fault of the

installer. It is a bug. I have no idea what warnings Ubuntu 7.1 gives and

whether or not they are adequate.

 

The user does NOT apply the changes. The user at best agrees to allow the

system to apply those changes. At worst he has no choice, other than the

choice to install.

Unruh wrote:

> Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:

>

>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:21:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>

>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>> news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...

>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>> news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>>>>> news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> 8<

>>>>>>> Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant.

>>>>>>> Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing

>>>>>>> I notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if I

>>>>>>> select use

>>>>>>> the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>>> SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>> For use entire disk

>>>>>>> and

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> For use largest free space.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.

>>>>>>> Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?

>>>>>>

>>>>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions were

>>>>>> created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your Win

>>>>>> partition, the ball game is over.

>>>>>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to use

>>>>>> the whole disk.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>> As they are the warnings they are the problem. There may be a need for

>>>>> more warnings or just a better partitioner but that

>>>>> is an addition.

>>>> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win

>>>> partition is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is

>>>> irrelevant. It was the repartitioning that destroyed the windows data.

>>>> (Yes, I know that the data is still there and that IF you managed to

>>>> repartition the disk again to exactly the same as it was before, you

>>>> could recover the data, but that is largely irrelevant to almost all

>>>> users. It is the partitioning that destroys the ability to access the

>>>> data). Thus if there is no warning on the repartitioning then that is

>>>> where the problem lies.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>> Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few more questions and

>>> then applies the changes.

>

>> No, the user applies the changes.

>

>>> It is at the point just before it applies the changes that it puts up

>>> the warning about destroying data.

>>> If you abort no changes are made (or none are supposed to be made, I

>>> have not checked myself).

>>> Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the majority of users and

>>> in the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.

>

>> Then maybe those users should not be installing operating systems.

>

> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users. It is (almost) impossible to

> find Linux preinstalled. Thus the installation routing needs to be set up

> to allow installation by users. If the installer does not give adequate

> warning that things are going to be destroyed, it is the fault of the

> installer. It is a bug. I have no idea what warnings Ubuntu 7.1 gives and

> whether or not they are adequate.

>

 

 

If you have no idea whether they are adequate or

not, or even if they are given or not,

how can you even comment?

caver1

caver1 wrote:

> Unruh wrote:

>> Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:

 

>> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users. It is (almost)

>> impossible to

>> find Linux preinstalled. Thus the installation routing needs to be set up

>> to allow installation by users. If the installer does not give adequate

>> warning that things are going to be destroyed, it is the fault of the

>> installer. It is a bug. I have no idea what warnings Ubuntu 7.1 gives and

>> whether or not they are adequate.

>

>

> If you have no idea whether they are adequate or not, or even if they

> are given or not,

> how can you even comment?

> caver1

 

The warnings on our local gasoline pumps are adequate but that doesn't

stop the occasional unforeseen error or some idiot setting themselves

alight.

caver1 <caver@inthemud.com> writes:

>Unruh wrote:

>> Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:

>>

>>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:21:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>>

>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>> news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...

>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>>> news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>>>>>> news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> 8<

>>>>>>>> Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant.

>>>>>>>> Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing

>>>>>>>> I notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if I

>>>>>>>> select use

>>>>>>>> the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>>>> SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>> For use entire disk

>>>>>>>> and

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> For use largest free space.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.

>>>>>>>> Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions were

>>>>>>> created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your Win

>>>>>>> partition, the ball game is over.

>>>>>>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to use

>>>>>>> the whole disk.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>> As they are the warnings they are the problem. There may be a need for

>>>>>> more warnings or just a better partitioner but that

>>>>>> is an addition.

>>>>> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win

>>>>> partition is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is

>>>>> irrelevant. It was the repartitioning that destroyed the windows data.

>>>>> (Yes, I know that the data is still there and that IF you managed to

>>>>> repartition the disk again to exactly the same as it was before, you

>>>>> could recover the data, but that is largely irrelevant to almost all

>>>>> users. It is the partitioning that destroys the ability to access the

>>>>> data). Thus if there is no warning on the repartitioning then that is

>>>>> where the problem lies.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>> Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few more questions and

>>>> then applies the changes.

>>

>>> No, the user applies the changes.

>>

>>>> It is at the point just before it applies the changes that it puts up

>>>> the warning about destroying data.

>>>> If you abort no changes are made (or none are supposed to be made, I

>>>> have not checked myself).

>>>> Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the majority of users and

>>>> in the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.

>>

>>> Then maybe those users should not be installing operating systems.

>>

>> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users. It is (almost) impossible to

>> find Linux preinstalled. Thus the installation routing needs to be set up

>> to allow installation by users. If the installer does not give adequate

>> warning that things are going to be destroyed, it is the fault of the

>> installer. It is a bug. I have no idea what warnings Ubuntu 7.1 gives and

>> whether or not they are adequate.

>>

 

>If you have no idea whether they are adequate or

>not, or even if they are given or not,

>how can you even comment?

 

I just did. and if you read it, you notice I was commenting on the previous

comment not giving facts about Ubuntu. Notice also the conditional (If) I

seems from various comments that it does NOT give adequate warning, and the

warning that was posted was certainly well beyond the point at which a

warning should have been given. Do you have more information about what the

warning actually is?

In the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy,

Unruh <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> didnst hastily scribble thusly:

>>Then maybe those users should not be installing operating systems.

> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users.

 

Is that what he said?

he didn't say any, he said THOSE. Those being the ones so STUPID they'd try

to stop a chainsaw with their genitals if it didn't say not to on the label.

 

People like the original poster.

> It is (almost) impossible to

> find Linux preinstalled.

 

Then use it as a live CD until you can find a friend who knows what a disk

partition is.

--

______________________________________________________________________________

| spike1@freenet.co.uk | |

|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |

| in | suck is probably the day they start making |

| Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unruh wrote:

> caver1 <caver@inthemud.com> writes:

>

>> Unruh wrote:

>>> Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:

>>>

>>>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:21:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>> news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...

>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>>>> news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>>>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>>>>>>> news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>>>>>>>> 8<

>>>>>>>>> Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant.

>>>>>>>>> Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing

>>>>>>>>> I notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if I

>>>>>>>>> select use

>>>>>>>>> the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>>>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>> For use entire disk

>>>>>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>> For use largest free space.

>>>>>>>>> One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.

>>>>>>>>> Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?

>>>>>>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions were

>>>>>>>> created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your Win

>>>>>>>> partition, the ball game is over.

>>>>>>>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to use

>>>>>>>> the whole disk.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> As they are the warnings they are the problem. There may be a need for

>>>>>>> more warnings or just a better partitioner but that

>>>>>>> is an addition.

>>>>>> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win

>>>>>> partition is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is

>>>>>> irrelevant. It was the repartitioning that destroyed the windows data.

>>>>>> (Yes, I know that the data is still there and that IF you managed to

>>>>>> repartition the disk again to exactly the same as it was before, you

>>>>>> could recover the data, but that is largely irrelevant to almost all

>>>>>> users. It is the partitioning that destroys the ability to access the

>>>>>> data). Thus if there is no warning on the repartitioning then that is

>>>>>> where the problem lies.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>> Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few more questions and

>>>>> then applies the changes.

>>>> No, the user applies the changes.

>>>>> It is at the point just before it applies the changes that it puts up

>>>>> the warning about destroying data.

>>>>> If you abort no changes are made (or none are supposed to be made, I

>>>>> have not checked myself).

>>>>> Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the majority of users and

>>>>> in the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.

>>>> Then maybe those users should not be installing operating systems.

>>> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users. It is (almost) impossible to

>>> find Linux preinstalled. Thus the installation routing needs to be set up

>>> to allow installation by users. If the installer does not give adequate

>>> warning that things are going to be destroyed, it is the fault of the

>>> installer. It is a bug. I have no idea what warnings Ubuntu 7.1 gives and

>>> whether or not they are adequate.

>>>

>

>

>> If you have no idea whether they are adequate or

>> not, or even if they are given or not,

>> how can you even comment?

>

> I just did. and if you read it, you notice I was commenting on the previous

> comment not giving facts about Ubuntu. Notice also the conditional (If) I

> seems from various comments that it does NOT give adequate warning, and the

> warning that was posted was certainly well beyond the point at which a

> warning should have been given. Do you have more information about what the

> warning actually is?

 

 

Here is a quote as I haven't figured out how to

get a screen shot in here,

"If you continue,the changes listed below

will be written to the

disks. Otherwise, you will be able to make further

changes manually.

 

Warning: This will destroy all data on any

partition you have removed as well as on the

partitions that are going to be formatted.

.................................

Write the changes to disk?"

 

caver1

On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 01:03:24 +0000, Unruh wrote:

> Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:

>

>>On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:21:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>

>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>> news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...

>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>"Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>>news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>>>>>news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>8<

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>Having downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start

>>>>>>>installing I notice that I get the same warning screen (identical

>>>>>>>AFAICS) if I select use

>>>>>>>the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>>(0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>>>SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>For use entire disk

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>and

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>>(0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1 of

>>>>>>>SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap

>>>>>>

>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>For use largest free space.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>Does anyone still think the warnings are OK?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions were

>>>>>> created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your Win

>>>>>> partition, the ball game is over.

>>>>>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to use

>>>>>> the whole disk.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>As they are the warnings they are the problem. There may be a need

>>>>>for more warnings or just a better partitioner but that is an

>>>>>addition.

>>>>

>>>> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win

>>>> partition is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is

>>>> irrelevant. It was the repartitioning that destroyed the windows

>>>> data. (Yes, I know that the data is still there and that IF you

>>>> managed to repartition the disk again to exactly the same as it was

>>>> before, you could recover the data, but that is largely irrelevant to

>>>> almost all users. It is the partitioning that destroys the ability to

>>>> access the data). Thus if there is no warning on the repartitioning

>>>> then that is where the problem lies.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>> Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few more questions

>>> and then applies the changes.

>

>>No, the user applies the changes.

>

>>> It is at the point just before it applies the changes that it puts up

>>> the warning about destroying data.

>>> If you abort no changes are made (or none are supposed to be made, I

>>> have not checked myself).

>>> Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the majority of users

>>> and in the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.

>

>>Then maybe those users should not be installing operating systems.

>

> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users.

 

IMO, it can easily be installed by most computer literate users. Those

users that shouldn't be installing LInux, also shouldn't be installing

Windows and maybe not even MacOS.

> It is (almost) impossible to find Linux preinstalled.

 

Well, there is Dell, if you look hard. :-)

> Thus the installation routing needs to be

> set up to allow installation by users. If the installer does not give

> adequate warning that things are going to be destroyed, it is the fault

> of the installer. It is a bug. I have no idea what warnings Ubuntu 7.1

> gives and whether or not they are adequate.

 

There have been screen shots posted in this thread.

>

> The user does NOT apply the changes. The user at best agrees to allow

> the system to apply those changes.

 

OK, the user makes the decision.

> At worst he has no choice, other than the choice to install.

 

The user has a number of choices. Go install Ubuntu somewhere.

 

 

 

--

Rick

On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 20:43:32 -0500, Charlie Tame wrote:

> caver1 wrote:

>> Unruh wrote:

>>> Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:

>

>

>>> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users. It is (almost)

>>> impossible to

>>> find Linux preinstalled. Thus the installation routing needs to be set

>>> up to allow installation by users. If the installer does not give

>>> adequate warning that things are going to be destroyed, it is the

>>> fault of the installer. It is a bug. I have no idea what warnings

>>> Ubuntu 7.1 gives and whether or not they are adequate.

>>

>>

>> If you have no idea whether they are adequate or not, or even if they

>> are given or not,

>> how can you even comment?

>> caver1

>

> The warnings on our local gasoline pumps are adequate but that doesn't

> stop the occasional unforeseen error or some idiot setting themselves

> alight.

 

.... then the warnings are adequate and the idiot shouldn't be pumping gas.

 

 

 

--

Rick

On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 05:45:54 +0000, Unruh wrote:

> caver1 <caver@inthemud.com> writes:

>

>>Unruh wrote:

>>> Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:

>>>

>>>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:21:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>>>

>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>> news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...

>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>>>> news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>>>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>>>>>>> news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> 8<

>>>>>>>>> Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant. Having

>>>>>>>>> downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing I

>>>>>>>>> notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if

>>>>>>>>> I select use

>>>>>>>>> the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1

>>>>>>>>> of SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as

>>>>>>>>> swap <<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>> For use entire disk

>>>>>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition #1

>>>>>>>>> of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>>> as swap <<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> For use largest free space.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't. Does anyone

>>>>>>>>> still think the warnings are OK?

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions

>>>>>>>> were created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your

>>>>>>>> Win partition, the ball game is over.

>>>>>>>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to

>>>>>>>> use the whole disk.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> As they are the warnings they are the problem. There may be a need

>>>>>>> for more warnings or just a better partitioner but that is an

>>>>>>> addition.

>>>>>> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win

>>>>>> partition is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is

>>>>>> irrelevant. It was the repartitioning that destroyed the windows

>>>>>> data. (Yes, I know that the data is still there and that IF you

>>>>>> managed to repartition the disk again to exactly the same as it was

>>>>>> before, you could recover the data, but that is largely irrelevant

>>>>>> to almost all users. It is the partitioning that destroys the

>>>>>> ability to access the data). Thus if there is no warning on the

>>>>>> repartitioning then that is where the problem lies.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>> Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few more questions

>>>>> and then applies the changes.

>>>

>>>> No, the user applies the changes.

>>>

>>>>> It is at the point just before it applies the changes that it puts

>>>>> up the warning about destroying data.

>>>>> If you abort no changes are made (or none are supposed to be made, I

>>>>> have not checked myself).

>>>>> Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the majority of users

>>>>> and in the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.

>>>

>>>> Then maybe those users should not be installing operating systems.

>>>

>>> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users. It is (almost)

>>> impossible to find Linux preinstalled. Thus the installation routing

>>> needs to be set up to allow installation by users. If the installer

>>> does not give adequate warning that things are going to be destroyed,

>>> it is the fault of the installer. It is a bug. I have no idea what

>>> warnings Ubuntu 7.1 gives and whether or not they are adequate.

>>>

>>>

>

>>If you have no idea whether they are adequate or not, or even if they

>>are given or not, how can you even comment?

>

> I just did. and if you read it, you notice I was commenting on the

> previous comment not giving facts about Ubuntu. Notice also the

> conditional (If) I seems from various comments that it does NOT give

> adequate warning, and the warning that was posted was certainly well

> beyond the point at which a warning should have been given. Do you have

> more information about what the warning actually is?

 

There have been at least 2 screenshots posted.

 

The original poster's:

<http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/32522/2001738602340396146_rs.jpg>

 

And another:

<http://www.saunalahti.fi/pirisisi/test/kubuntuinstallation.png>

 

The second is a kubuntu install.

 

--

Rick

On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 09:18:14 -0400, caver1 wrote:

> Unruh wrote:

>> caver1 <caver@inthemud.com> writes:

>>

>>> Unruh wrote:

>>>> Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:

>>>>

>>>>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:21:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>>> news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...

>>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>>>>> news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>>>>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>>>>>>>> news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... 8<

>>>>>>>>>> Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant. Having

>>>>>>>>>> downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing I

>>>>>>>>>> notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if

>>>>>>>>>> I select use

>>>>>>>>>> the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space. The

>>>>>>>>>> partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition

>>>>>>>>>> #1 of SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of

>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap <<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>> For use entire disk

>>>>>>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are changed:

>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1 (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition

>>>>>>>>>> #1 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of

>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap <<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>> For use largest free space.

>>>>>>>>>> One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't. Does anyone

>>>>>>>>>> still think the warnings are OK?

>>>>>>>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions

>>>>>>>>> were created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your

>>>>>>>>> Win partition, the ball game is over.

>>>>>>>>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to

>>>>>>>>> use the whole disk.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> As they are the warnings they are the problem. There may be a

>>>>>>>> need for more warnings or just a better partitioner but that is

>>>>>>>> an addition.

>>>>>>> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win

>>>>>>> partition is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is

>>>>>>> irrelevant. It was the repartitioning that destroyed the windows

>>>>>>> data. (Yes, I know that the data is still there and that IF you

>>>>>>> managed to repartition the disk again to exactly the same as it

>>>>>>> was before, you could recover the data, but that is largely

>>>>>>> irrelevant to almost all users. It is the partitioning that

>>>>>>> destroys the ability to access the data). Thus if there is no

>>>>>>> warning on the repartitioning then that is where the problem lies.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>> Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few more questions

>>>>>> and then applies the changes.

>>>>> No, the user applies the changes.

>>>>>> It is at the point just before it applies the changes that it puts

>>>>>> up the warning about destroying data.

>>>>>> If you abort no changes are made (or none are supposed to be made,

>>>>>> I have not checked myself).

>>>>>> Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the majority of users

>>>>>> and in the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.

>>>>> Then maybe those users should not be installing operating systems.

>>>> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users. It is (almost)

>>>> impossible to find Linux preinstalled. Thus the installation routing

>>>> needs to be set up to allow installation by users. If the installer

>>>> does not give adequate warning that things are going to be destroyed,

>>>> it is the fault of the installer. It is a bug. I have no idea what

>>>> warnings Ubuntu 7.1 gives and whether or not they are adequate.

>>>>

>>>>

>>

>>> If you have no idea whether they are adequate or not, or even if they

>>> are given or not, how can you even comment?

>>

>> I just did. and if you read it, you notice I was commenting on the

>> previous comment not giving facts about Ubuntu. Notice also the

>> conditional (If) I seems from various comments that it does NOT give

>> adequate warning, and the warning that was posted was certainly well

>> beyond the point at which a warning should have been given. Do you have

>> more information about what the warning actually is?

>

>

> Here is a quote as I haven't figured out how to get a screen shot in

> here,

> "If you continue,the changes listed below

> will be written to the

> disks. Otherwise, you will be able to make further changes manually.

>

> Warning: This will destroy all data on any partition you have removed

> as well as on the partitions that are going to be formatted.

> ................................

> Write the changes to disk?"

>

> caver1

 

There are several web sites that allow you to post pictures. You could

get an account, post screen shots there, and post a url.

 

 

 

--

Rick

Rick wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 09:18:14 -0400, caver1 wrote:

>

>> Unruh wrote:

>>> caver1 <caver@inthemud.com> writes:

>>>

>>>> Unruh wrote:

>>>>> Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:

>>>>>

>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:21:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>>>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>>>> news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...

>>>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>>>>>> news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>>>>>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>>>>>>>>> news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... 8<

>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway we will forget licenses as that is irrelevant. Having

>>>>>>>>>>> downloaded Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing I

>>>>>>>>>>> notice that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if

>>>>>>>>>>> I select use

>>>>>>>>>>> the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space. The

>>>>>>>>>>> partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition

>>>>>>>>>>> #1 of SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of

>>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap <<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>>> For use entire disk

>>>>>>>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are changed:

>>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1 (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition

>>>>>>>>>>> #1 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of

>>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap <<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>>> For use largest free space.

>>>>>>>>>>> One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't. Does anyone

>>>>>>>>>>> still think the warnings are OK?

>>>>>>>>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions

>>>>>>>>>> were created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your

>>>>>>>>>> Win partition, the ball game is over.

>>>>>>>>>> The place that the warning should occur is when you tell it to

>>>>>>>>>> use the whole disk.

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> As they are the warnings they are the problem. There may be a

>>>>>>>>> need for more warnings or just a better partitioner but that is

>>>>>>>>> an addition.

>>>>>>>> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win

>>>>>>>> partition is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is

>>>>>>>> irrelevant. It was the repartitioning that destroyed the windows

>>>>>>>> data. (Yes, I know that the data is still there and that IF you

>>>>>>>> managed to repartition the disk again to exactly the same as it

>>>>>>>> was before, you could recover the data, but that is largely

>>>>>>>> irrelevant to almost all users. It is the partitioning that

>>>>>>>> destroys the ability to access the data). Thus if there is no

>>>>>>>> warning on the repartitioning then that is where the problem lies.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few more questions

>>>>>>> and then applies the changes.

>>>>>> No, the user applies the changes.

>>>>>>> It is at the point just before it applies the changes that it puts

>>>>>>> up the warning about destroying data.

>>>>>>> If you abort no changes are made (or none are supposed to be made,

>>>>>>> I have not checked myself).

>>>>>>> Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the majority of users

>>>>>>> and in the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.

>>>>>> Then maybe those users should not be installing operating systems.

>>>>> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users. It is (almost)

>>>>> impossible to find Linux preinstalled. Thus the installation routing

>>>>> needs to be set up to allow installation by users. If the installer

>>>>> does not give adequate warning that things are going to be destroyed,

>>>>> it is the fault of the installer. It is a bug. I have no idea what

>>>>> warnings Ubuntu 7.1 gives and whether or not they are adequate.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>> If you have no idea whether they are adequate or not, or even if they

>>>> are given or not, how can you even comment?

>>> I just did. and if you read it, you notice I was commenting on the

>>> previous comment not giving facts about Ubuntu. Notice also the

>>> conditional (If) I seems from various comments that it does NOT give

>>> adequate warning, and the warning that was posted was certainly well

>>> beyond the point at which a warning should have been given. Do you have

>>> more information about what the warning actually is?

>>

>> Here is a quote as I haven't figured out how to get a screen shot in

>> here,

>> "If you continue,the changes listed below

>> will be written to the

>> disks. Otherwise, you will be able to make further changes manually.

>>

>> Warning: This will destroy all data on any partition you have removed

>> as well as on the partitions that are going to be formatted.

>> ................................

>> Write the changes to disk?"

>>

>> caver1

>

> There are several web sites that allow you to post pictures. You could

> get an account, post screen shots there, and post a url.

>

>

>

 

 

Its not really worth getting another account

somewhere just to refute someones

constant "what if".

What if the world was flat. Just because you say

it isn't why should I believe you?

After all I'm blind and can't see it for myself.

caver1

On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 10:36:58 -0400, caver1 wrote:

> Rick wrote:

>> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 09:18:14 -0400, caver1 wrote:

>>

>>> Unruh wrote:

>>>> caver1 <caver@inthemud.com> writes:

>>>>

>>>>> Unruh wrote:

>>>>>> Rick <none@nomail.com> writes:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:21:46 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>>>>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>>>>> news:G%tSi.22040$GO5.20439@edtnps90...

>>>>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> "Unruh" <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote in message

>>>>>>>>>> news:fzrSi.22002$GO5.6664@edtnps90...

>>>>>>>>>>> "dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> writes:

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message

>>>>>>>>>>>> news:%23QMATTYEIHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... 8< Anyway we

>>>>>>>>>>>> will forget licenses as that is irrelevant. Having downloaded

>>>>>>>>>>>> Ubuntu 7.10 and finally got it to start installing I notice

>>>>>>>>>>>> that I get the same warning screen (identical AFAICS) if I

>>>>>>>>>>>> select use

>>>>>>>>>>>> the whole disk or if I select use the biggest free space. The

>>>>>>>>>>>> partition tables of the following devices are changed: SCSI1

>>>>>>>>>>>> (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition

>>>>>>>>>>>> #1 of SCSI1(,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of

>>>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap <<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>>>> For use entire disk

>>>>>>>>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>>>>> The partition tables of the following devices are changed:

>>>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1 (0,0,0)(sda)

>>>>>>>>>>>> The following partitions are going to be formatted: partition

>>>>>>>>>>>> #1 of SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as ext3 partition #5 of

>>>>>>>>>>>> SCSI1(0,0,0)(sda) as swap <<<<<<<<<<< For use largest free

>>>>>>>>>>>> space.

>>>>>>>>>>>> One will erase my windows server 2008 one won't. Does anyone

>>>>>>>>>>>> still think the warnings are OK?

>>>>>>>>>>> The problem is NOT there. There problem is when the partitions

>>>>>>>>>>> were created. Once they have been createdi so as to cover your

>>>>>>>>>>> Win partition, the ball game is over. The place that the

>>>>>>>>>>> warning should occur is when you tell it to use the whole

>>>>>>>>>>> disk.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> As they are the warnings they are the problem. There may be a

>>>>>>>>>> need for more warnings or just a better partitioner but that is

>>>>>>>>>> an addition.

>>>>>>>>> No. Once you have repartitioned the disk, the data from you win

>>>>>>>>> partition is gone. defunct, non-existant. formatting the disk is

>>>>>>>>> irrelevant. It was the repartitioning that destroyed the windows

>>>>>>>>> data. (Yes, I know that the data is still there and that IF you

>>>>>>>>> managed to repartition the disk again to exactly the same as it

>>>>>>>>> was before, you could recover the data, but that is largely

>>>>>>>>> irrelevant to almost all users. It is the partitioning that

>>>>>>>>> destroys the ability to access the data). Thus if there is no

>>>>>>>>> warning on the repartitioning then that is where the problem

>>>>>>>>> lies.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Linux sets up the partitions in ram, then asks a few more

>>>>>>>> questions and then applies the changes.

>>>>>>> No, the user applies the changes.

>>>>>>>> It is at the point just before it applies the changes that it

>>>>>>>> puts up the warning about destroying data. If you abort no

>>>>>>>> changes are made (or none are supposed to be made, I have not

>>>>>>>> checked myself).

>>>>>>>> Its just that the warnings are inadequate for the majority of

>>>>>>>> users and in the case of Ubuntu 7.10 wrong.

>>>>>>> Then maybe those users should not be installing operating systems.

>>>>>> Oh nuts. Linux can ONLY be installed by users. It is (almost)

>>>>>> impossible to find Linux preinstalled. Thus the installation

>>>>>> routing needs to be set up to allow installation by users. If the

>>>>>> installer does not give adequate warning that things are going to

>>>>>> be destroyed, it is the fault of the installer. It is a bug. I have

>>>>>> no idea what warnings Ubuntu 7.1 gives and whether or not they are

>>>>>> adequate.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>> If you have no idea whether they are adequate or not, or even if

>>>>> they are given or not, how can you even comment?

>>>> I just did. and if you read it, you notice I was commenting on the

>>>> previous comment not giving facts about Ubuntu. Notice also the

>>>> conditional (If) I seems from various comments that it does NOT give

>>>> adequate warning, and the warning that was posted was certainly well

>>>> beyond the point at which a warning should have been given. Do you

>>>> have more information about what the warning actually is?

>>>

>>> Here is a quote as I haven't figured out how to get a screen shot in

>>> here,

>>> "If you continue,the changes listed below

>>> will be written to the

>>> disks. Otherwise, you will be able to make further changes manually.

>>>

>>> Warning: This will destroy all data on any partition you have removed

>>> as well as on the partitions that are going to be formatted.

>>> ................................

>>> Write the changes to disk?"

>>>

>>> caver1

>>

>> There are several web sites that allow you to post pictures. You could

>> get an account, post screen shots there, and post a url.

>>

>

> Its not really worth getting another account somewhere just to refute

> someones

> constant "what if".

> What if the world was flat. Just because you say it isn't why should I

> believe you?

> After all I'm blind and can't see it for myself. caver1

 

I was just making a suggestion ...

 

 

 

--

Rick