Quoting Colin Watson (cjwat...@debian.org):
Since I've already done most of the work for this in Ubuntu, I'm happy
to volunteer for this. (For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not committed to
an implementation identical to that currently in Ubuntu, although I was
planning to use that as a base;
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 06:49:53AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
Quoting Colin Watson (cjwat...@debian.org):
I absolutely think that we should be using UUIDs by default for devices
where there isn't some other stable naming, as Ubuntu does.
I agree.
As I said earlier, we now just need
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 10:51:34PM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 08:15:55PM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I believe it would be much safer to use labels for partitions rather
than using the device nodes.
Automatically assigning labels is a really,
Quoting Colin Watson (cjwat...@debian.org):
For automatic assignment, I honestly think UUIDs are the best answer,
After reading all bugs related to this, I confirm that I also think
UUIDs are the best answer.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Quoting Colin Watson (cjwat...@debian.org):
I absolutely think that we should be using UUIDs by default for devices
where there isn't some other stable naming, as Ubuntu does.
I agree.
As I said earlier, we now just need to dinf someone who would commit
self to do it.
I suggest we add this
Colin Watson wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 08:15:55PM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I believe it would be much safer to use labels for partitions rather
than using the device nodes.
Automatically assigning labels is a really, really bad idea. Red Hat
tried this and the result was
reassign 509378 partman-target
forcemerge 509378 389881
thanks
I now have the right reference:
http://bugs.debian.org/389881
...is roughly the same suggestion than the one you're doing right
now. It talks about SCSI devices but the bug discussion makes it clear
that persistent naming goes much
reassign 509378 partman-base
thanks
Quoting Daniel Pocock (dan...@pocock.com.au):
Package: debian-installer
I believe it would be much safer to use labels for partitions rather
than using the device nodes.
Reassigning to the correct package. We might even have an already
existing bug
Christian Perrier wrote:
Quoting Daniel Pocock (dan...@pocock.com.au):
Package: debian-installer
I believe it would be much safer to use labels for partitions rather
than using the device nodes.
Reassigning to the correct package. We might even have an already
existing bug
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 08:15:55PM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I believe it would be much safer to use labels for partitions rather
than using the device nodes.
Automatically assigning labels is a really, really bad idea. Red Hat
tried this and the result was that if you did two Red Hat
Package: debian-installer
I believe it would be much safer to use labels for partitions rather
than using the device nodes.
This is not such a big issue for LVM filesystems, as they can always be
found using the same name.
However, for SCSI devices, the failure to use labels is causing
11 matches
Mail list logo
