[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [dm-devel] What is the deal with the partition separator?
- From: Phillip Susi <psusi cfl rr com>
- To: Curtis Gedak <gedakc gmail com>
- Cc: device-mapper development <dm-devel redhat com>, serge hallyn ubuntu com, parted-devel lists alioth debian org, Debian LVM Team <pkg-lvm-maintainers lists alioth debian org>
- Subject: Re: [dm-devel] What is the deal with the partition separator?
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 14:33:31 -0500
On 2/16/2011 12:19 PM, Curtis Gedak wrote:
> Only newer versions of (lib)parted which link with the dmraid library
> work this way with dmraid devices. In this situation it is the dmraid
> library that is coming up with the device names. For all other devices,
> (lib)parted uses the "linux scheme since the dawn of time" mentioned
> below. Older versions of (lib)parted follow the "linux scheme since the
> dawn of time".
(lib)parted does not link to dmraid; it contains its own code to
generate the name by always adding the 'p' in libparted/arch/linux.c.
> GParted uses (lib)parted to come up with device names, except in the
> case of dmraid devices. Because dmraid does not follow the "linux
> scheme since the dawn of time", gparted calls dmraid directly to create
> names following the old dmraid standard (only append partition number to
> device name). If kpartx is available, then GParted will call kpartx to
> ensure that dmraid device names follow the "linux scheme since the dawn
> of time". This behaviour enables GParted to work with all versions of
> dmraid, and maintain compatibility with (lib)parted versions 1.7.1 and
> higher.
It shouldn't be using both dmraid and kpartx to create the partition
devices. If dmraid does it, then calling kpartx at best does nothing,
and at worst creates duplicate devices.
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]