21 May
2009
21 May
'09
5:11 p.m.
Tobias Powalowski schrieb:
Hi folks: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/14745 I haven't used qtparted in ages and it seems partitionman seems more up to date and developed.
We might add it, but as partitionman is not a successor of qtparted, a "replaces" directive seems wrong. I don't use qtparted and don't know partitionman, but I have no objections to adding one or dropping the other - if nobody else objects, do as you think.