Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 08:43:14 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> Cc: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Accessing disks via their serial numbers. Message-ID: <44838.1151311394@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 26 Jun 2006 10:00:38 %2B0200." <20060626080038.GA12511@garage.freebsd.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20060626080038.GA12511@garage.freebsd.pl>, Pawel Jakub Dawidek writ es: There is a not at all subtle difference between names which relate to the contents of the disk (as for g_label) or names which relate to a specific physical position (as for ATA_STATIC_ID) and what you propose where the name binds to a specific drive mechanism. The former two allows you to do offline copy/recovery and replacement of a disk drive, the latter does not. >Glabel(8) currently supports labeling any GEOM provider, but it steals >the last sector, which is not always acceptable. When is it not acceptable ? And is this the only reason why you think we need serial numbers for names ? >[...], but we need to have a general >mechanism inside the kernel for getting such informations. This is a very broad statement, and I don't agree (yet). -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44838.1151311394>