Switch from legacy ata(4) to CAM-based ATA
dougb at FreeBSD.org
Thu Apr 21 00:23:59 UTC 2011
On 04/20/2011 16:01, Warren Block wrote:
> Not sure I understand the question. I have a little article called
> FreeBSD Labeled Filesystems:
That's a good article, but it highlights what seem to be some
deficiencies in the various implementations. For the most part they seem
ufs-centric, although glabel shows some promise for supporting ext2fs
and msdosfs (both of which are workhorse file systems for me). In your
article you point out another thing that seems sub-optimal to me,
different locations for different types of things which are all referred
to as labels.
My primary concern however is, quite frankly, that it isn't being done
the way linux does it, on 2 fronts. First, I like the fact that on linux
the labels are created with uuidgen at install time, and all the
configuration is transparent to the user. Here is a good article that
gives an overview: http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/146951, although
searching for "linux uuid disk label" yielded a lot of good results.
(Testing with our uuidgen(1) I noticed that we would probably need to do
some work to support more methods to make it a little less predictable,
but that shouldn't be difficult).
The other concern I have is that having installed linux (ubuntu
specifically) it's already created labels for things. If I run glabel is
it potentially going to overwrite them? Why can't 'glabel list' (or some
other tool) "see" those labels? And if this kind of label already
exists, why can't we just use it?
Finally, is glabel (which seems to be the only option for multi-fs
labeling) be used safely for at least msdosfs and ext2fs? And if glabel
is safe to use for all of our supported file systems, can they safely be
mounted that way?
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
More information about the freebsd-current