Bug#787666: multipath-tools: discussion about devname of mpath[0-9]+ vs. mpath[a-z]+
On Thursday 04 June 2015 03:36 AM, Mauricio Faria de Oliveira wrote: Hi Ritesh, Regarding the option for Debian to stay on devnames like mpath[0-9]+ rather than that adopted upstream, mpath[a-z]+ (patch 0002).. Do you mind explaining to me if there's any particular reasons for that? Or how (un)likely is it to switch over to upstream? (I'd know of one point, that is Jessie using the old number-suffix). Can you please give me some more context here ? I'm trying to minimize any extra patches, so that we are less deviated from upstream. The current set of patches carried, are either trivial ones or important for Debian for other dependency reasons. Another point is, if that doesn't change, is it possible in the mean time to move patch 0002 to the end of the series, and add support for alias_prefix [1], so to ease the addition of upstream/backport patches (i.e., before the last patch in the series)? By 0002, you mean debian/patches/0002-Make-user_friendly_names-compatible-to-multipath-too.patch ??? That patch is no more in use. It was dropped long ago. -- Ritesh Raj Sarraf RESEARCHUT - http://www.researchut.com Necessity is the mother of invention. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#787666: multipath-tools: discussion about devname of mpath[0-9]+ vs. mpath[a-z]+
Control: notfound -1 multipath-tools/0.5.0-7 Control: found -1 multipath-tools/0.4.9-3 Control: fixed -1 multipath-tools/0.4.9+git0.4dfdaf2b-1 Control: close -1 Ritesh, On 06/09/2015 07:41 AM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: Regarding the option for Debian to stay on devnames like mpath[0-9]+ rather than that adopted upstream, mpath[a-z]+ (patch 0002).. snip By 0002, you mean debian/patches/0002-Make-user_friendly_names-compatible-to-multipath-too.patch ??? That patch is no more in use. It was dropped long ago. Oops; sorry, I didn't check it correctly. I mistakenly checked 0.4.9-3, where Ubuntu branched off some years ago. I see the patch was dropped a few months later. Apologies. -- Mauricio Faria de Oliveira IBM Linux Technology Center -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#787666: multipath-tools: discussion about devname of mpath[0-9]+ vs. mpath[a-z]+
Package: src:multipath-tools Version: 0.5.0-7 Severity: wishlist Hi Ritesh, Regarding the option for Debian to stay on devnames like mpath[0-9]+ rather than that adopted upstream, mpath[a-z]+ (patch 0002).. Do you mind explaining to me if there's any particular reasons for that? Or how (un)likely is it to switch over to upstream? (I'd know of one point, that is Jessie using the old number-suffix). Another point is, if that doesn't change, is it possible in the mean time to move patch 0002 to the end of the series, and add support for alias_prefix [1], so to ease the addition of upstream/backport patches (i.e., before the last patch in the series)? Thanks! [1] Add alias_prefix to get multipath names based on storage type commit b36393b528a28ea2f0777caabc28cf61ded27a13 -- Mauricio Faria de Oliveira IBM Linux Technology Center -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
