1 |
Elaine C. Sharpe wrote: |
2 |
> In linux.gentoo.user, you wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> |
5 |
>> Yep, I read about others having problems and loosing data. |
6 |
>> |
7 |
>> Dale |
8 |
>> |
9 |
>> :-) :-) |
10 |
>> |
11 |
> You can read about others having problems and losing data with pretty |
12 |
> much every bit of software ever coded. *Lots* of people are not particularly |
13 |
> competent and write horroe stories or bad reviews without bothering to |
14 |
> mention the errors they made which actually caused the problem. |
15 |
> I see evidence of that on this very list daily. So IMO your method is |
16 |
> a bit suspect. :) |
17 |
> |
18 |
> |
19 |
|
20 |
The opposite can be said too. I seem to recall hal working for a lot of |
21 |
people but for me, it was a miserable failure and forced me into a hard |
22 |
reset. |
23 |
|
24 |
Just because something works for most people, doesn't mean it will for |
25 |
everyone either. If you lose data, it doesn't matter. LVM just adds |
26 |
one more layer of something to go wrong. Me, I don't need the extra |
27 |
risk of having a system that doesn't boot and a loss of data. I'm sure |
28 |
there are a lot of people that see it the way I do too. They just don't |
29 |
need the extra risk. |
30 |
|
31 |
Dale |
32 |
|
33 |
:-) :-) |