On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 12:20 PM Jay F. Shachter <j...@m5.chicago.il.us> wrote:
> > > > > As the primary author of OpenBSD's current fdisk/disklabel/etc. I > > was intrigued by your recent email to misc@ .... [I]f you want > > disklabel(8) to say "Linux LVM" for sd0l you would need at a minimum > > a patch to /usr/src/sys/sys/disklabel.h to add an FS_LINUXLVM define > > and the string "Linux LVM" to the immediately following > > fstypenames[] array.... > > > > Please forgive me for being unclear. > > I was not asking whether my Linux volume group could be recognized by > the OpenBSD "disklabel" program as a Linux volume group, and correctly > identified as such. That would certainly be nice, and a welcome > improvement to the disklabel program, but it was not what I was > asking. I was asking whether Linux logical volumes can be recognized > as disk devices by the OpenBSD kernel, in the way that they can be > recognized in NetBSD, and in FreeBSD. Thus, if I have a multiboot > computer, on which Linux, FreeBSD, and NetBSD have been installed, and > if, on the Linux system, I create a volume group named "vgname", and I > then create within that volume group a logical volume named "lvname", > then, on the NetBSD system, I can access this logical volume by using > the exact same names that are used on Linux: either /dev/vgname/lvname, > or /dev/mapper/vgname-lvname. On FreeBSD the device name is slightly > different, on FreeBSD you say /dev/linux_lvm/vgname-lvname, but in > either case the logical volume is visible. My question for this > mailing list was: Are Linux logical volumes visible, or can they be > made visible, on an OpenBSD system? > > I have already remarked that my Solaris, Linux, FreeBSD, and NetBSD > systems can share disk storage (e.g., the /home/jay directory) by > means of a ZFS pool, but that OpenBSD cannot, because OpenBSD does not > support ZFS, and that, therefore, installing an OpenBSD system on the > same hardware will require some duplication of otherwise shared disk > storage (and I wonder, parenthetically, why FreeBSD and NetBSD are > willing to support ZFS, but OpenBSD is not). > Stuart already told you this: "Not likely to happen. Even if there was an implementation written, patents are involved (use is granted via the CDDL but that's not an acceptable license for OpenBSD)."
