Subject: Re: Another changer, another changer problem
To: Roger Brooks <R.S.Brooks@liverpool.ac.uk>
From: David Maxwell <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/02/1998 20:05:39
On Fri, Oct 02, 1998 at 05:00:40PM +0100, Roger Brooks wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Oct 1998, David Maxwell wrote:
> >mount -l dm_root /
> >Where -l is meant to mean 'name from diskLabel'. If mount knew this, and
> Duh... You mean mount wanders off, groping all the disks it can find until
> it gets one with the right label? What if it finds more than one with the
> required label? I don't see how you could enforce a requirement that the
> label names be unique (particularly if you have removeable media).
My answer to the second question is this -> you put two drives on SCSI ID 1,
you shot yourself in the foot. Have a nice day. As for the groping, yes it's
a bit ugly, but it's only once, at mount time.
> If you let it use the first matching label it finds, aren't you back where
> you started? Also, unless they are *partition* labels (not disk labels),
> you couldn't quite do things as in your example (assuming you want more
> than one partition per disk).
Right. I wasn't attempting to be too precise here, more to get comments
on the concept, and see if this solved any of the issues the c?t?d?s?
David Maxwell, email@example.comfirstname.lastname@example.org --> Mastery of UNIX, like
mastery of language, offers real freedom. The price of freedom is always dear,
but there's no substitute. Personally, I'd rather pay for my freedom than live
in a bitmapped, pop-up-happy dungeon like NT. - Thomas Scoville