From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 3 22:45:47 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BC92106564A for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 22:45:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from sippysoft.com (gk1.360sip.com [72.236.70.240]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E78548FC1B for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 22:45:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [192.168.1.38] (S0106001372fd1e07.vs.shawcable.net [70.71.171.106]) (authenticated bits=0) by sippysoft.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n13MjjIl036626 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 3 Feb 2009 14:45:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <4988C908.1030002@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 14:45:28 -0800 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Sippy Software, Inc. User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ivan Voras References: <20090203082153.565746e2@zelda.local> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: GEOM_PART: a quick update on logical partitions X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 22:45:47 -0000 Ivan Voras wrote: > Marius NĂ¼nnerich wrote: > >> I'm not happy with the symlinks either. When someone is manipulating a >> partition table she should be able to live with the consequences. I >> would rather go for the UUID in UFS header approach if there is enough >> room. BTW I implemented GPT UUID glabels a while ago please see: >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=128398 > > I have a patch for UFS "GUID" labels (not exactly GUIDs, but every UFS > file system has a reasonably unique ID associated with it) but have > encountered what seems a bug in GEOM slicers - two dev entries pointing > to the same device don't work well with orphaning/tasting. Have you > encountered something similar perhaps? Why exactly do we need UFS "GUID" labels, when we already have GEOM_LABEL, which works just fine with UFS. -Maxim