Joel Sing, 12 Apr 2015 03:14:
On Wednesday 01 April 2015, frantisek holop wrote:
Theo de Raadt, 30 Mar 2015 18:09:
IIRC 'bioctl -d' cannot deal with DUID's.
not a showstopper, just sayin'
Sounds like you might use this. Want to trial a diff that adds
support? If it is wrong,
On Wednesday 01 April 2015, frantisek holop wrote:
Theo de Raadt, 30 Mar 2015 18:09:
IIRC 'bioctl -d' cannot deal with DUID's.
not a showstopper, just sayin'
Sounds like you might use this. Want to trial a diff that adds
support? If it is wrong, don't worry, someone will hate your bad
Theo de Raadt, 30 Mar 2015 18:09:
IIRC 'bioctl -d' cannot deal with DUID's.
not a showstopper, just sayin'
Sounds like you might use this. Want to trial a diff that adds
support? If it is wrong, don't worry, someone will hate your bad
diff, and do it right. (That is pretty much the
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 4:04 PM, frantisek holop min...@obiit.org wrote:
Theo de Raadt, 15 Mar 2015 12:15:
Yes I do. when I install machines that I dump/restore clone, I do
not use DUID's. it's very nice to make a system without DUID's in
that case.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand the
Theo de Raadt, 15 Mar 2015 12:15:
Yes I do. when I install machines that I dump/restore clone, I do
not use DUID's. it's very nice to make a system without DUID's in
that case.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand the usage case here which blocks
DUIDS, so let's see a better explanation or
Theo de Raadt, 15 Mar 2015 12:15:
Yes I do. when I install machines that I dump/restore clone, I do
not use DUID's. it's very nice to make a system without DUID's in
that case.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand the usage case here which blocks
DUIDS, so let's see a better explanation or
Editing the device names after the fact is fine for my usage.
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org wrote:
I guess as long as /etc/fstab continues to support non-DUID device
names, it can be manually edited after the initial system build.
Of course the
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 21:27:41 -0600 Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda
acam...@verlet.org wrote:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org
wrote:
DUID support was written so that we could solve a problem, without
a question. This is a mop-up operation. The
On 2015/03/15 21:50, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2015/03/15 17:37, System Administrator wrote:
I guess as long as /etc/fstab continues to support non-DUID device
names, it can be manually edited after the initial system build.
However, that also opens the window to transcription errors
On 2015/03/16 08:14, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2015/03/15 21:50, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2015/03/15 17:37, System Administrator wrote:
I guess as long as /etc/fstab continues to support non-DUID device
names, it can be manually edited after the initial system build.
However, that
Using DUIDs in the installed /etc/fstab has been the default for some time now.
We'd like to eliminate the question in the installer and just use
DUIDs unconditionally.
But first we need to know you are aware of any circumstances where
people need or prefer to use the non-DUID option when
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:24:32AM -0400, Kenneth Westerback wrote:
Using DUIDs in the installed /etc/fstab has been the default for some time
now.
We'd like to eliminate the question in the installer and just use
DUIDs unconditionally.
But first we need to know you are aware of
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:24:32AM -0400, Kenneth Westerback wrote:
Using DUIDs in the installed /etc/fstab has been the default for some time
now.
We'd like to eliminate the question in the installer and just use
DUIDs unconditionally.
But first we need to know you are aware of any
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:24:32AM -0400, Kenneth Westerback wrote:
Using DUIDs in the installed /etc/fstab has been the default for some time
now.
We'd like to eliminate the question in the installer and just use
DUIDs unconditionally.
But first we need to know you are aware of
15 марта 2015 г. 21:26 пользователь Robert Peichaer rob...@peichaer.org
написал:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 09:03:45PM +0300, Vadim Zhukov wrote:
15 ?? 2015 ??. 20:50 Theo de Raadt
dera...@cvs.openbsd.org
??:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at
On March 15, 2015 8:18:59 PM GMT+01:00, Vadim Zhukov persg...@gmail.com wrote:
15 марта 2015 г. 21:26 пользователь Robert Peichaer
rob...@peichaer.org
написал:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 09:03:45PM +0300, Vadim Zhukov wrote:
15 ?? 2015 ??. 20:50 Theo de
Raadt
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:24:32AM -0400, Kenneth Westerback wrote:
Using DUIDs in the installed /etc/fstab has been the default for some time
now.
We'd like to eliminate the question in the installer and just use
DUIDs unconditionally.
But first we need to know you are aware of any
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:24:32AM -0400, Kenneth Westerback wrote:
Using DUIDs in the installed /etc/fstab has been the default for some time
now.
We'd like to eliminate the question in the installer and just use
DUIDs unconditionally.
But first we need to know you are aware of
It's very nice to make a system without DUID's in that case.
Better question is:
Why?
The only visible effect from the admin perspective is the first column
in /etc/fstab, which now contains an unambigious tag.
All the sysadm tools can the DUID names.
15 марта 2015 г. 20:50 пользователь Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org
написал:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:24:32AM -0400, Kenneth Westerback wrote:
Using DUIDs in the installed /etc/fstab has been the default for some
time now.
We'd like to eliminate the question in the installer
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 09:03:45PM +0300, Vadim Zhukov wrote:
15 ?? 2015 ??. 20:50 Theo de Raadt
dera...@cvs.openbsd.org
??:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:24:32AM -0400, Kenneth Westerback wrote:
Using DUIDs in the installed /etc/fstab has
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:24:32AM -0400, Kenneth Westerback wrote:
Using DUIDs in the installed /etc/fstab has been the default for some time
now.
We'd like to eliminate the question in the installer and just use
DUIDs unconditionally.
But first we need to know you are aware of any
Yes I do. when I install machines that I dump/restore clone, I do not
use DUID's. it's very nice to make a system
without DUID's in that case.
I think you could eliminate the DUID question for laptops. it's always
right there. I'd like to keep it for server's but don't
know if that's reasonably
Yes I do. when I install machines that I dump/restore clone, I do
not use DUID's. it's very nice to make a system without DUID's in
that case.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand the usage case here which blocks
DUIDS, so let's see a better explanation or demonstration.
When you have DUIDs in
On 3/15/15, Michael W. Lucas mwlu...@michaelwlucas.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 01:06:37PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Look, if people keep being unspecific on how DUIDs interfere with
their usage patterns, then the non-DUID configuration mode is going
to go away.
WHY must be use the
I guess as long as /etc/fstab continues to support non-DUID device
names, it can be manually edited after the initial system build.
Of course the non-DUID device names will continue working.
OK, this seems like a conversation with people who never read
the code to see how DUID works. What a
Do all arches work with DUIDs now? I have a recollection of problems
somewhere not all that long ago. Might have been sparc or vax or something.
DUID support is unconditional in the installer.
It is possible to have some disks that have non-OpenBSD labels, in which
case the DUID might not be
On 2015/03/15 17:37, System Administrator wrote:
I guess as long as /etc/fstab continues to support non-DUID device
names, it can be manually edited after the initial system build.
However, that also opens the window to transcription errors which can
easily render the system
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 01:06:37PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Look, if people keep being unspecific on how DUIDs interfere with
their usage patterns, then the non-DUID configuration mode is going
to go away.
WHY must be use the non-DUID option in the installer??!?!?!
As someone who
On 3/15/15, Michael W. Lucas mwlu...@michaelwlucas.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 01:06:37PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Look, if people keep being unspecific on how DUIDs interfere with
their usage patterns, then the non-DUID configuration mode is going
to go away.
WHY must be
Do all arches work with DUIDs now? I have a recollection of problems
somewhere not all that long ago. Might have been sparc or vax or something.
I don't care whether the installer uses DUIDs or not, as long as 1) they
work and 2) the option to use /dev/sd0a etc remains in fstab.
Here is a similar use-case:
I maintain a number of HA clusters with fully automatic bi-directional
synchronization using rdist. To achieve this I have as few file
differences as possible and those that must differ (mostly
hostname.$if) being entirely scriptable -- the sole noteable exception
On 03/15/15 14:59, Jiri B wrote:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:24:32AM -0400, Kenneth Westerback wrote:
Using DUIDs in the installed /etc/fstab has been the default for some time
now.
We'd like to eliminate the question in the installer and just use
DUIDs unconditionally.
But first we need
The only thing I'd like to have is a command or easy way
to convert a duid to a /dev/sd0a name to use current - or future -
utilities that don't support DUID like badblocks from e2fsprogs
in ports...
In disklabel, you can see the duid for a drive;
disklabel sd0 | grep duid
Alternatively,
On 15 March 2015 at 23:38, Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org wrote:
The only thing I'd like to have is a command or easy way
to convert a duid to a /dev/sd0a name to use current - or future -
utilities that don't support DUID like badblocks from e2fsprogs
in ports...
In disklabel, you
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org wrote:
DUID support was written so that we could solve a problem, without
a question. This is a mop-up operation. The question being posed
is not shall we leave the non-DUID question, but what DUID support
gaps still
36 matches
Mail list logo
