KDE-LiveCD: gparted or qtparted?

[Frank Schmitt]

Sebastian Vahl <ml at 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.