Re: RFC: Possible (partial) solution for device persistence issue
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 04:27:19PM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote:
> Op 16-10-2006 om 00:06 schreef Frans Pop:
> > On Sunday 15 October 2006 23:45, Geert Stappers wrote:
> > > The thing I would like to see is that the _difference_ in device naming
> > > between d-i kernel plus fellows and installed kernel plus fellows is
> > > solved.
> > See the discussions that we have had about this in the past.
> > The culprit is the kernel/udev: that can load drivers in a different order
> > any time. It is not something we can solve in the installer.
> > The experts have said that using UUID is the best solution. I agree that
> > it is extremely ugly.
it is see very practical, see for example this usage example
> Dear Kernel developers,
> Your work is appriceated, but I have a request:
> Please allow reproducable hardware detection.
> As systemadministrator I can't affort having a disk that is one moment
> /dev/sda and the next reboot /dev/sdb.
> Having a fast booting system is great, having disks swapped not.
the kernel _never_ guaranteed stable device nodes,
that is an userspace policy.
use the tools that provide that.
> Please prefer consistence above speed.
> Thank you for reading this humble plea.
> Geert Stappers
edgy udev transforms the fstab to use plain uuids,
to guarantee correct root recognition.
i guess their installer also add uuid entries to the newly
installed fstab - why is that not in d-i?