On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 01:54:24PM +0100, Heinz J . Mauelshagen wrote: > > Brian, Hi Heinz. > yes, at the end of the day you can't prevent people with the necessary > credentials from shooting themselves in the foot anyways. > That occasionally includes me. > At least at ~4pm in the morning ;) I hear ya. Me too. :-) > Because LVM is a block layer service transparent to filesystems or any other > arbitrary block device user, it should just cover the necessary block device > functionality. I don't disagree with that. > Putting additional overloading block/filesystem layer services not necessarily > needed there into the kernel is unlikely to be accepted either IMO. No. No. Not in the kernel. I mean the user space tools can simply check what data is on the block device (i.e. look for a known signature of given filesystems) and see if it can determine if it is indeed a filesystem. > Controlling LVM block device and filesystem changes in userspace with an > (e2)fsadm tool is a "helping hand" for the unexperienced, not limiting > the experienced user. > This is our prefered way to go. That is fair enough. And I don't care that strongly about this issue, but just thought of how many tools (in their "interactive mode" anyway) stop and ask a user before they are about to do something potentially disasterous. b. -- Brian J. Murrell
Attachment:
pgp00445.pgp
Description: PGP signature
