On Thu 15 Feb 2024 at 16:12:06 (+0000), Andy Smith wrote: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 09:56:07PM -0500, gene heskett wrote: > > > On 2/14/24 19:48, Andy Smith wrote: > > > > I hope you are putting a level of redundancy under that LVM or are > > > > using the redundancy features of LVM (which you need to go out of > > > > your way to do). Otherwise by default what you'll have is not > > > > redundant and a device failure will lose at least the contents of > > > > that device, possibly more. > > > > > > You pique my curiosity because this is going to be my backup system, but not > > a syllable about how to do it. You tell me its fine 3 paragraphs up. then > > tell me lvcreate will wipe it out. I'm asking for answers, not more > > connumdrums.. > > You've split your reply to my mail across three different emails and > now you're replying to a part about redundancy, but asking questions > about something completely different, all while referring to bits > that are not proximal to where your text is, so it's unclear to me > exactly what you are asking about. > > You asked if "labels" would survive their associated partition being > put into LVM. > > I said, "yes if you mean partition names, no if you mean filesystem > labels". > > To my implied question about your redundancy plans (if any), you > then complain that I have not given you "a syllable about how to do > it". Do *what*? I don't yet know what your plans are in that regard. > If you have questions, ask them.
I think the paste in https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2024/02/msg00611.html shows that SiPwr_1 is a filesystem LABEL, not a PARTLABEL, lying as it does between an FSVER and a UUID. Cheers, David.
