martin f krafft <madd...@madduck.net> writes: > also sprach Neil Brown <ne...@suse.de> [2010.02.23.0330 +0100]: >> The problem to protect against is any consequence of rearranging >> devices while the host is off, including attaching devices that >> previously were attached to a different computer. > > How often does this happen, and how grave/dangerous are the effects? > >> But if '/' is mounted by a name in /dev/md/, I want to be sure >> mdadm puts the correct array at that name no matter what other >> arrays might be visible. > > Of course it would be nice if this happened, but wouldn't it be > acceptable to assume that if someone swaps drives between machines > that they ought to know how to deal with the consequences, or at > least be ready to tae additional steps to make sure the system still > boots as desired? > > Even if the wrong array appeared as /dev/md0 and was mounted as root > device, is there any actual problem, other than inconvenience? > Remember that the person who has previously swapped the drives is > physically in front of (or behind ;)) the machine. > > I am unconvinced. I think we should definitely switch to using > filesystem-UUIDs over device names, and that is the only real > solution to the problem, no?
Both filesystems and LVM have UUIDs. Does dm-crypt / LUKS have one too? MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org