Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 04:27:07PM -0700, Rick Stevens wrote:
> Uh, oh. Methinks I see an issue here. First, I didn't know you could
> use labels for swap partitions (since they don't have a real filesystem
> on them).
They've supported labels for quite a while now. See the -L parameter
to mkswap.
Yeah, I see that and I realized it. I guess I'm too old-school. I
used to hate labeling filesystems and using them in fstab, but with
Linux' propensity now to identify drives in absolutely no predictable
way whatsoever, it's almost a requirement.
If there are any kernel coders listening, would you guys PLEASE try to
be consistent in the sequence you scan for drives? Obviously, you know
what interface is being used for each drive (since it ends up in /proc).
You could at least PUBLISH what the sequence is.
Example: An F7 machine with one SATA drive and two IDE drives (both on
the same IDE controller). On one F7 kernel, the kernel picks them up
as:
sda: IDE primary
sdb: IDE slave
sdc: SATA
which is also the sequence the BIOS sees them. On the next bloody
kernel release:
sda: SATA
sdb: IDE primary
sdc: IDE slave
What the hell? Makes configuring grub or using grub-install a right
pain for a tyro. I can sort it out, but some of my less skilled friends
had tons of problems with it. F8 seemed sorta consistent, but I'm
concerned that F9 may screw it up yet again with the 2.6.5-series of
kernels.
C'mon. Consistency and predictability are good qualities, guys.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer rps2@xxxxxxxx -
- Hosting Consulting, Inc. -
- -
- I was married by a judge. I should have asked for a jury. -
- -- Groucho Marx -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
