Bug#572376: linux-base: Please use UUID for swap, not LABEL
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 04:08:36AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 13:50 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
[...]
A few references I found:
http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-u...@lists.debian.org/msg478822.html
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=364441
Does all of this provide sufficient reason, or should I provide more?
:)
There is one argument you missed: consistency with new installations,
which do use UUIDs. So I will consider doing this now, but it's quite a
lot of work.
Well, I've now done the work and committed it to svn. You can test it
now if you want ('make -f debian/rules.real install-linux-base' will
build just that one binary) or wait for the next experimental upload.
Thanks! I'll try the experimental upload as soon as it appears.
By the way, in trying to convert things over to UUIDs, you might want to
take a look at uswsusp; see bug 572729.
- Josh Triplett
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#572376: linux-base: Please use UUID for swap, not LABEL
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 13:50 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
[...]
A few references I found:
http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-u...@lists.debian.org/msg478822.html
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=364441
Does all of this provide sufficient reason, or should I provide more?
:)
There is one argument you missed: consistency with new installations,
which do use UUIDs. So I will consider doing this now, but it's quite a
lot of work.
Well, I've now done the work and committed it to svn. You can test it
now if you want ('make -f debian/rules.real install-linux-base' will
build just that one binary) or wait for the next experimental upload.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Time is nature's way of making sure that everything doesn't happen at once.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#572376: linux-base: Please use UUID for swap, not LABEL
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 23:26 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:01:02AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 11:41 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: Package: linux-base Version: 2.6.33-1~experimental.2 Severity: normal The conversion script decided to use LABEL=myhostname-swap for my swap partition. Swap partitions support UUIDs too; please consider using those instead. I think labels are far more user-friendly since they are actually memorable. Therefore, for devices that have both a label and a UUID, the label will be used, and for devices that have neither, a label will be generated. You are free to reject the plan and edit files yourself. Unless you can give a very good reason why UUIDs are preferable, I will not implement this. I can give several good reasons. UUIDs generally can't collide; labels can. Bad Things could happen if two different partitions end up with the same label. That's why I include the hostname in generated labels, and avoid all the existing disk labels. Consider what would happen if you had a Linux install on a USB flash drive. (I have several specialized Debian systems that run off USB drives.) What happens if you plug a system with a partition labeled / into a system which already has a partition labeled /? UUIDs generally won't appear anywhere where user-friendly matters. Users shouldn't fiddle with /etc/fstab or similar unless they have a clue. Graphical tools will use a label if available, even if the actual mount call doesn't. And clueful users can remember UUIDs, can they? Furthermore, filesystems won't necessarily already have labels, while all filesystems *should* have UUIDs. Though this is not yet true for swap partitions. A few references I found: http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-u...@lists.debian.org/msg478822.html https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=364441 Does all of this provide sufficient reason, or should I provide more? :) There is one argument you missed: consistency with new installations, which do use UUIDs. So I will consider doing this now, but it's quite a lot of work. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Q. Which is the greater problem in the world today, ignorance or apathy? A. I don't know and I couldn't care less. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#572376: linux-base: Please use UUID for swap, not LABEL
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:50:41PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 23:26 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:01:02AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 11:41 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: Package: linux-base Version: 2.6.33-1~experimental.2 Severity: normal The conversion script decided to use LABEL=myhostname-swap for my swap partition. Swap partitions support UUIDs too; please consider using those instead. I think labels are far more user-friendly since they are actually memorable. Therefore, for devices that have both a label and a UUID, the label will be used, and for devices that have neither, a label will be generated. You are free to reject the plan and edit files yourself. Unless you can give a very good reason why UUIDs are preferable, I will not implement this. I can give several good reasons. UUIDs generally can't collide; labels can. Bad Things could happen if two different partitions end up with the same label. That's why I include the hostname in generated labels, and avoid all the existing disk labels. And hostnames, of course, can *never* collide between similar systems. ;) Consider what would happen if you had a Linux install on a USB flash drive. (I have several specialized Debian systems that run off USB drives.) What happens if you plug a system with a partition labeled / into a system which already has a partition labeled /? UUIDs generally won't appear anywhere where user-friendly matters. Users shouldn't fiddle with /etc/fstab or similar unless they have a clue. Graphical tools will use a label if available, even if the actual mount call doesn't. And clueful users can remember UUIDs, can they? Clueful users can copy/paste from /etc/fstab or the output of mount, or they can use the device names like they frequently already do. Furthermore, filesystems won't necessarily already have labels, while all filesystems *should* have UUIDs. Though this is not yet true for swap partitions. H, annoying that mkswap didn't already set UUIDs by default, but at least all future swap partitions can have them by default. A few references I found: http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-u...@lists.debian.org/msg478822.html https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=364441 Does all of this provide sufficient reason, or should I provide more? :) There is one argument you missed: consistency with new installations, which do use UUIDs. So I will consider doing this now, but it's quite a lot of work. Greatly appreciated work, though. Thank you for your efforts. - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#572376: linux-base: Please use UUID for swap, not LABEL
Package: linux-base Version: 2.6.33-1~experimental.2 Severity: normal The conversion script decided to use LABEL=myhostname-swap for my swap partition. Swap partitions support UUIDs too; please consider using those instead. Thanks, Josh Triplett -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.33-2-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages linux-base depends on: ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.28 Debian configuration management sy ii libapt-pkg-perl 0.1.24 Perl interface to libapt-pkg linux-base recommends no packages. linux-base suggests no packages. -- debconf information: linux-base/disk-id-manual: * linux-base/disk-id-convert-auto: true * linux-base/disk-id-convert-plan: true -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#572376: linux-base: Please use UUID for swap, not LABEL
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 11:41 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: Package: linux-base Version: 2.6.33-1~experimental.2 Severity: normal The conversion script decided to use LABEL=myhostname-swap for my swap partition. Swap partitions support UUIDs too; please consider using those instead. I think labels are far more user-friendly since they are actually memorable. Therefore, for devices that have both a label and a UUID, the label will be used, and for devices that have neither, a label will be generated. You are free to reject the plan and edit files yourself. Unless you can give a very good reason why UUIDs are preferable, I will not implement this. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings The world is coming to an end. Please log off. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#572376: linux-base: Please use UUID for swap, not LABEL
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:01:02AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 11:41 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: Package: linux-base Version: 2.6.33-1~experimental.2 Severity: normal The conversion script decided to use LABEL=myhostname-swap for my swap partition. Swap partitions support UUIDs too; please consider using those instead. I think labels are far more user-friendly since they are actually memorable. Therefore, for devices that have both a label and a UUID, the label will be used, and for devices that have neither, a label will be generated. You are free to reject the plan and edit files yourself. Unless you can give a very good reason why UUIDs are preferable, I will not implement this. I can give several good reasons. UUIDs generally can't collide; labels can. Bad Things could happen if two different partitions end up with the same label. Consider what would happen if you had a Linux install on a USB flash drive. (I have several specialized Debian systems that run off USB drives.) What happens if you plug a system with a partition labeled / into a system which already has a partition labeled /? UUIDs generally won't appear anywhere where user-friendly matters. Users shouldn't fiddle with /etc/fstab or similar unless they have a clue. Graphical tools will use a label if available, even if the actual mount call doesn't. Furthermore, filesystems won't necessarily already have labels, while all filesystems *should* have UUIDs. A few references I found: http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-u...@lists.debian.org/msg478822.html https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=364441 Does all of this provide sufficient reason, or should I provide more? :) - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
