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

Re: udev device naming policy concerns

Theodore Ts'o wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 12:00:48AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Won't work for cdroms, partition formats without UUID,
>> filesystems without label .... but lets ignore those for a moment.
> (1)  Removeable medias have their own problem since what's important is
> generally not *which* CD-ROM player/drive, but *which* CD-ROM has been
> inserted, regardless of which drive the CD-ROM happened to be inserted
> into.
Except when it *is* 'which drive', which it is occasionally, such as when
comparing two putatively identical discs, or when inserting blank CD-RWs,
or....  :-P

> (2) ISO 9660 and do have label support.  Mount doesn't support it yet,
> but there are patches that convert it to use the blkid library, and it
> woudln't be that hard to add label support for CD-ROM's.  This would
> actually be far more useful, since we could now mount the CD-ROM in a
> different location based on the contents of the CD-ROM, rather than
> based on the CD-ROM's SCSI id or position in the SCSI chain, both of
> which are equally wrong, although simpler.
As long as there's a method available to mount by CD-ROM drive as well, this
sounds nice; I wouldn't want to be stuck *only* mounting by label!

> (3) Most filesystems have UUID's and/or Labels at this point.
>> If you use this argument you should be in support of using LABEL= or
>> UUID= when creating the fstab in the Debian-Installer, right?
> Correct, I would be in favor of doing this, since it correctly solves
> the problem even if the SCSI id of the device changes.  This will
> become even more important if people are using devices that are based
> on Firewire or USB, where the SCSI id is even more subject to change,
> and therefore just as useless as "/dev/sda".  You really should be
> mounting based on filesystem UUID or Label.
> - Ted

Make sure your vote will count.

Reply to: