[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       fedora-devel-list
Subject:    Re: KDE-LiveCD: gparted or qtparted?
From:       Frank Schmitt <ich () frank-schmitt ! net>
Date:       2007-04-19 8:34:12
Message-ID: m3d520iwzf.fsf () mid ! gehheimdienst ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Sebastian Vahl <ml@deadbabylon.de> writes:

> We (KDE-SIG) want to include one of these partitionin tools.
> qtparted would be the best choice because it is qt. But personally I've
> only used gparted the last time (years). For me it was working better.
>
> Also the described functionality differs:
> gparted: http://gparted.sourceforge.net/features.php
> qtparted: http://qtparted.sourceforge.net/features.en.html
>
> So the question here is: Are there good reasons for choosing qtparted
> instead of gparted? Or is gtparted equal in functionality?

Recent experience of mine when I wanted to make room for a Linux install
on a new Thinkpad with SATA drive: qtparted (from Knoppix 5.1) gave me
an empty error box (e.g. without any error message) whenever I told it
to resize the NTFS windows partition. gparted from an Ubuntu Live-CD I
had lying around work flawlessly and looked generally much more polished
and mature.

-- 
Did you ever realize how much text fits in eighty columns? If you now consider
that a signature usually consists of up to four lines, this gives you enough
space to spread a tremendous amount of information with your messages. So seize
this opportunity and don't waste your signature with bullshit nobody will read.

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]