On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Timothy Murphy <gayleard(a)eircom.net> wrote:
As far as I can see, the poster was not objecting to LVM per se;
he was simply asserting that it should not be the default,
which I agree with.
The original objection was mine, and that is absolutely correct. Just
because some technology exists, is not a good and sufficient reason to
use it as a default. LVM brings nothing but confusion to most users.
--
Marc Wilson
msw(a)cox.net