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

Re: preliminary patch towards XEN virtual disk naming

On Sunday 06 April 2008, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> With the attached patch it becomes:
>   4. XEN virtual disk 1, partition #1 (xvda1) - 5.4 GB Unknown 
> And similarly for full-disk devices.  Now:
>  * Does it make sense to output the disk number (1,2...)?

IMO, yes. Other disk types also include an identification of the particular 
disk in that part of the description. If a sequence number based on the 
device number is the best we can do, then that will have to do.

I would vote for starting the numbering at 1, not 0, as linking 1 to xvda is 
most natural.

>  * Should we allow multi-letter devices like /dev/xvdaa?

Depends whether it is at all likely that it will be reached in practice...

>  * libparted should also recognize the device type, which isn't much
>    of a problem (based on a cursory look at the sources).  But that
>    would just duplicate the info on the line at best.  Probably
>    something else is needed...  But what?

I don't think duplication is disastrous. One option would be to just 
use "Virtual disk" in partman (without "Xen" before it). Then parted's 
description would be a useful further specification of the type of virtual 

On Sunday 06 April 2008, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> I've noticed that Sid uses parted-1.7.1, which was released in
> 2005...  Only experimental has 1.8.8, which is fairly current.
> Assuming there's a good reason for this, should the Debian version
> incorporate these xvd changes?

There have been several attempts to update parted, but each failed because 
of regressions. The plan is to update it for Lenny.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: