I've noticed that the naming of the devices is very inconsistent. Just within SuSE SLES 9, I see /dev/disk/by-path/ccw-0.0.07ffp1 and /dev/disk/by-path/ccw-0.0.07ff1. And as noted, this is different from SLES 10 which had /dev/disk/by-path/ccw-0.0.07ff-part1.
Isn't the point of this to have predictable names for the devices? But if you can't predict what the predictable name will be, how is it any better than /dev/dasda and /dev/dasdb? On 5/27/08 2:13 PM, "Mark Post" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 10:14 PM, in message > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marcy > Cortes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> We use /dev/disk/by-path >> >> names to label all of our disks on sles9 rather than the /dev/dasda.. In >> zipl.conf for the root= as well as in /etc/fstab. >> >> Now.. Sles10 has decided that instead of >> /dev/disk/by-path/ccw-0.0.0100p1 >> It will call the disk >> /dev/disk/by-path/ccw-0.0.0100-part1 >> >> So the upgrade process doesn't work. >> Is there a better way other than reverting back to /dev/dasda.. And then >> changing it backup again when we're doing upgrading? > > What exactly happens during the upgrade? I haven't tried this myself, so I > don't know. > > > Mark Post > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit > http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
