Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre <email@example.com> (2017-02-10): > That's perhaps right; we could possibly do away with the [0-9] part in the > check. The reason for changing it to [a-z] was only to have the smallest > amount of changes possible. I don't see what benefit that would really > bring though, but I haven't looked at multipath in a while. Knowing nothing about multipath, I first read the multipath-tools commit message as “[0-9] → [a-z] only when user friendly names are enabled, [0-9] otherwise”, which I why I was wondering whether we were losing support in the non-user friendly names case; but that doesn't seem to be the case. > I also could have been more proactive at this; I'll update the > branches shortly -- there has been further changes to > partman-multipath and hw-detect to help with multipath support. Feel free to let me know once you've done so, since I've just uploaded hw-detect_1.123_source and partman-base_191_source. I suppose what's been just uploaded could be pushed to jessie, while what you'll be pushing in a moment would only be for stretch? > > > Apart from the disk-detect package, the partman-multipath package > > > is also affected by mpath naming change. I will open a separate > > > bug report and attach a patch to solve the naming there. > > > > I'll try and look at the various patches after Mathieu's reply in > > #806900. I might even propose them through proposed-updates if the > > next RC looks good for multipath support. > > I'm sorry, I just don't see what I should be replying to? We're really > not far from multipath support working (given that it does appear to > work reasonably well in Ubuntu). Let me do the merges to get Ubuntu > based on the right new versions of Debian, then we can do one round of > reviewing all the patches. I meant it as: thanks to your reply to me in that other bug report, I know what packages I should be looking at, not as “please do more work for me”. Apologies for the confusion. KiBi.
Description: Digital signature