Hans de Goede (hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx) said: >> ... why do we want to do this? Supporting two entirely separate code paths >> for a single device is *bad*. >> > > Because we will need both code paths anyways as for some bios-raid's mdraid > will be the preferred method, while others will only be supported by dmraid. Sure, you have to keep dmraid around for some legacy BIOSes, but... > Given that we need the 2 code paths anyways, making which one to use > configurable when both support the type of bios-raid is much easier, and > certainly much less error prone, then trying to handle device name changes > when upgrading. This means that for users of a particular BIOS, you get to write "If X, do Y. If A, do B" sort of docs, which are always bad. You get to wire distro-specific magic into anaconda, rc.sysinit, mkinitrd, dracut, etc., etc. You ensure that the old, dead, no longer maintained support for whichever tool is non-default for a format can never be turned off. And you require the user to pass magic options anyway. It's best to just cut the cord for people who need to migrate. It's a one-time user cost, as opposed to an ongoing maintenance cost. Bill _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
