Uwe Dippel wrote: > The logic for hda / sda dies on me too often. My issue is that I frequently add and remove drives from my system. For even more fun, the Linux drivers like to access the drives in a different order than the bios.
> On the other hand, I wasted days of my life with labels; I guess this is one of those "your mileage may vary" situations. I've never had any issues with labels. I also go out of my way to ensure there will never be duplicates. My *only* problem is I can't tell Grub which label to use. > I rather use the old-fashion count like > on Solaris, which doesn't differentiate between hda and sda, but simply > counts controllers and drives and partitions incrementally, as you all > are aware of. This is no answer, since c2d1p3 is arcane. Though, at > least, unambiguous. The Solaris scheme is basically like how IDE used to be done under Linux with predetermined names. Adding a drive could not change the name of existing drives. The Linux scsi naming means that adding a drive could change the name of an existing drive. > ZFS could in future lead to a better way of dealing with it, I find - > despite of its current shortcomings - the auto-discovery of pools quite > promising. That is just the same mechanism as labels. Note however that you still need a bootloader that can load the operating system kernel that has the ZFS drivers. > In the end, a DHCP-like system might evolve; scanning any plugged drive, > reading by all means your labels, and offer to mount the partitions / > drives. http://gujin.sourceforge.net/ > It is also high time, to remove grub from the installs and give it a > place in an extended BIOS, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Firmware_Interface Roger _______________________________________________ Bug-grub mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-grub
