Hi,
On 07/01/2009 12:09 AM, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Tuesday, June 30 2009, Hans de Goede said:
On 06/30/2009 11:08 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Hans de Goede (hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx) said:
I've been thinking about $SUBJECT lately, and I would like to propose the
following way to handle this:
1) Make the use of mdraid or dmraid for BIOS-raid supported by both
configurable both in anaconda (it already is) and in the installed OS
(so in relevant udev rules and / or in rc.sysinit).
anaconda will have a cmdline option to override the defaults, and the
installed system will have a /etc/sysconfig/biosraid file, with a
single setting:
PREFERRED_BIOSRAID_HANDLER
Which can be either dmraid or mdraid
... 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.
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.
I'm with Bill here. We just need to suck it up and have people pay the
migration cost rather than us having to maintain (and test!) both paths
in perpetuity.
Actually testing is an other reason why it would want to have this
configurable, so that I and Joel and others with Intel hardware can still
test the anaconda / dracut dmraid path.
Also I'm a bit confused now, when I proposed to just release note this
you were not in favor because we had already inflicted enough pain on
bios raid users in previous releases. Now I come up with a solution
to make this work seamlessly, and then we just need to suck it up ??
Regards,
Hans
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
