Hi, On 03/18/2010 09:49 PM, Phillip Susi wrote:
On 3/18/2010 3:50 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:1) If a partition number changes, should it be marked as dirty (So removed and re-added using BLKPG), IMHO: Yes2) What if sda7 is busy ? Options: a) leave it as sda7, inconsequent with parted print output, end result confused user, also see below wrt fstab b) Fail the commit User: but I'm allowed to change partitions as long as I don't touch the ones which are in use, end result confused userI think the only option is to require that the removal of an extended partition that would cause such a renumbering should fail. The user will not be confused because they will get the same message they do now when BLKRRPART fails, telling them that the kernel is still using the old table and they need to reboot for the changes to take effect. The only difference from using BLKRRPART would be that the partitions NOT in use with numbers higher than the one that was in use will have already been removed from the kernel.
True, that would work. Note that you will need to get Jim Meyering to buy on on this approach as well for it to get accepted upstream. Regards, Hans _______________________________________________ parted-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel
