Linux is not about choice [was Re: Fedora too cutting edge?]

[Andrew Farris]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> David Zeuthen wrote:
>> On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 11:00 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> But the old names were predictable; the new ones aren't - when I move 
>>> a disk to a new controller/drive position, I know about it.
>>
>> Uhm, no. You were just relying on a) limitations in the Linux kernel to
>> probe devices in a sequential fashion (see big-iron boxes with tens of
>> thousands of disks why this won't work); and b) the order of your
>> controllers on the PCI bus. Trying to argue it was "predictable" when it
>> was a "coincidence" is an interesting spin on reality. It's also wrong;
>> there's a reason that RHL and Fedora been using LABEL= for ages.
> 
> OK, that's at least partly right but you forgot to tell me what to call 
> the device when creating the label for filesystems that support it - or 
> what name to use for access to the raw device for operations like image 
> copies and addition/removal from raid arrays.  The underlying problem 
> can't be solved at the filesystem layer.

Try cat /etc/mtab.  The device being used for the particular label is clearly 
shown after its mounted, even when auto mounted by label in /etc/fstab.  I fail 
to see what is so hidden here.  When the device is connected to the machine its 
also identified in log messages as to which device node it is assigned.

>>> What I actually would argue is that a distribution making such 
>>> changes should supply tools to migrate configurations based on old 
>>> conventions to the new ones.  Maybe Fedora doesn't have users with 
>>> hundreds of machines and data that needs to span years of operation, 
>>> but a unix-like system should be designed to make that practical.
>>
>> No, Fedora is about being on the bleeding edge and creating a system
>> where you don't *need* to migrate configuration files because the files
>> will be correct if they are using stable identifiers for devices.
> 
> I haven't found that to be the case.  And I don't see any reason for 
> today's experimental change to end up being the one that sticks.

Anaconda should have handled changing your configuration change in /etc/fstab 
for you at install if all your partitions were labeled.  If they aren't all 
labeled this doesn't happen, which is a short-coming of anaconda in that it will 
not apply labels to FAT32 or NTFS disks that do not have them (and maybe other 
filesystems).  There are also bugs against anaconda about this and I think a 
number of them are closed rawhide so it should be better now.

-- 
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul at gmail.com> <ajfarris at gmail.com>
  gpg 0xC99B1DF3 fingerprint CDEC 6FAD BA27 40DF 707E A2E0 F0F6 E622 C99B 1DF3
No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer
----                                                                       ----