On Wed 10-08-16 16:23:06, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Wednesday 10 August 2016 15:39:02 Jan Kara wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed 10-08-16 14:53:49, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > On Wednesday 10 August 2016 14:38:59 Jan Kara wrote: > > > > we have noticed that since commit 2f2730bc77c9 "libblkid: udf: Fix reading > > > > LABEL, add support for UUID and other udf identifiers" some volumes have > > > > changed labels which are reported by blkid. See [1] for an example. > > > > > > "You are not authorized to access bug #983165." > > > > Ah, sorry. I forgot the bug is reported against SLES and so is not > > publically visible. Anyway, the initial comment which is interesting is: > > > > I have a shared paritition with an UDF filesystem. In Win7 64bit its label > > is 'ssd120_docs'. In SLES12SP1 its label is 'ssd120_dokumente'. In > > Tumbleweed (and most likely also SP2 Beta) its label is 'ssd120_dosemut' > > (or similar garbage). > > > > I think there should be some consistency in /dev/disk/by-label/*. > > --- > > > > As an explanation, SLES12SP1 uses util-linux 2.25 (i.e., before your patch), > > Tumbleweed is the rolling distro with the latest & greatest version. > > > > > > This is > > > > because that commit changed what is used for the label - previously we have > > > > used 'ident' in the Primary Volume Descriptor, and after that commit we use > > > > Logical Volume ID. > > > > > > Yes, thats true. > > > > > > > I think it would be better to keep consistency with older util-linux > > > > releases (e.g. valid /etc/fstab that uses labels may be broken by this > > > > change) but I'm not sure whether there is a point once the new behavior > > > > has been released in the util-linux release. But still I wanted to raise > > > > this since I'm not sure how much util-linux cares about these changes and > > > > also so that people are aware of the change... > > > > > > > > Honza > > > > > > > > [1] https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=983165 > > > > > > > > > > Reason why I proposed that change is because all other software use > > > Logical Volume Identifier as label. Just linux blkid used something > > > other. > > > > > > Basically Linux was incompatible with whole world and I think this was a > > > bug. Also UDF specification say something that LVI is displayed to user. > > > IIRC also Grub2 uses LVI as label identification. > > > > > > So I do not agree with reverting back old behaviour which is > > > incompatible with everything except old util-linux versions... > > > > Well, this somewhat does not match the description in the bug. Apparently > > Win7 uses yet another identifier in the UDF filesystem... > > Not good :-( Anyway, are you able to produce/create UDF disk image/dump > which show different label under Win7 and new util-linux? With that we > can inspect which field is Win7 using and could test also other systems > (like some BSD or Grub2) what see... > > Maybe there could be different behaviour for CD, DVD, HDD or > multisession CD/DVD... The reporter has UDF filesystem created on HDD AFAIU. I've asked him to run udf_test program on the fs image. From its output we should be able to see various identifiers of the filesystem and thus see whan Win7 uses. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
