[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: On persistency in newer live-boot



04/09/2012 05:11 PM, Daniel Baumann:
> On 04/09/2012 04:58 PM, anonym wrote:
>>> if we'd do that, we could, fs label wise, get away with 'overlay'
>>> and 'snapshot', both being below 11 characters, so no fallbacks
>>> for legacy fs'es/os'es would be needed.
> 
>> Perhaps 'live' is good enough as a new label? I leave the naming to
>> you.
> 
> live is a bit too generic, in particular since probably the rootfs
> might have such a label in some setups.

OTOH, a live-persistence.conf file must be present on the fs root in
addition to the 'live' label for it to make any difference.

> if we, as you impled, can unify the code so that snapshot and overlay
> is being deduced by live-boot from looking at the config file, then,
> we could use one label only.

It ought to be pretty simple since the home-sn code practically does
what we want already. I'll have a look at it some day soon, but I won't
promise anything :).

> i suggest that to be 'persistence' (which coincidentally is exactely
> 11 characters :).

Sounds fine.

Cheers!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: