On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Lamar Owen <lowen@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> While finding the corner cases seems to be your specialty, Les, recognize that there will always be a corner case not covered by any filesystem labeling/naming scheme, no matter what scheme is used.
>
I've found that it is a good idea to find concepts and implementations
that weren't very well thought out before they bite you somewhere, so
yes, I do go out of my way. For example when mounting by label was
first implemented, having a duplicate label (very likely if you move
disks around at all since the installer always used the same labels)
would keep the system from booting at all. You had to just say 'what
were they thinking...' - and wonder about the rest of the system.
> It's not at all hard to change the labels after the install.
To what? It's something that is going to hold some data in the
future. And you may not know you need to re-mount it until the
machine that labeled it is gone or dead and the drive is all that is
left.
Within 5.x I've found auto-assembled md devices to be pretty reliable
at identifying themselves, but booting the 6.x livecd completely
messed that up on the one machine where I tried it.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
