(Bug?): nummeration for preserved partions

[Manuel Hachtkemper]

MT wrote:
> Does that sufficiently clarify documentation? 
I think so. This could at least help some people who wonder about this behaviour.

> prefer not to change the semantics of these numbers as that might break existing
> setups in unexpected (and very dangerous) ways.
I agree with you, but could a change be considered for one of the next "major releases" (and warn about the changes)? I think not to change this would be wrong, either.

> Hope this helps,
Thank you!


TL wrote:
> Yes, we need a better description in setup-storage, how the partitions
> are numbered. We use the normal numbering the kernel does. Do you have
> a patch for this?
Unfortunatly no, I don't.


Sorry for the late response.

Best regards,
Manuel Hachtkemper
-------------- n?chster Teil --------------
Ein Dateianhang mit Binärdaten wurde abgetrennt...
Dateiname   : nicht verfügbar
Dateityp    : application/pgp-signature
Dateigröße  : 197 bytes
Beschreibung: Digital signature
URL         : <http://lists.uni-koeln.de/pipermail/linux-fai-devel/attachments/20101213/78313e46/attachment.bin>