https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=438434
--- Comment #22 from Martin Steigerwald <mar...@lichtvoll.de> --- (In reply to tagwerk19 from comment #20) > (In reply to Martin Steigerwald from comment #19) > > There is a huge discussion following this. I do not have the time to review > > it right now, however there might be something in it in order to make Baloo > > work for these use cases. > Many thanks for keeping watch on the topic and there is indeed a lot to read > through. > > Do you think this: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/162742539595.32498.13687924366155737575. > stgit@noble.brown/ > > could imply that the major:minor device numbers, as seen by stat (and > baloo), start relating to the subvol? cf: Tagwerk, this is not only related to BTRFS. As established before, device major:minor numbers by the kernel are not guaranteed to be stable across reboots. Using is as a static identifier inside Baloo thus, in my humble opinion, is a design mistake. About the alternatives, there are quite some, I am not completely decided on which one would be best. But unless there is an willingness to actually consider replacing using minor:major number with something else, there is no point to discuss this further I'd say. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
