On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 15:34 -0500, Aaron Konstam wrote: > On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 14:56 -0400, Mauriat Miranda wrote: > > On 5/5/06, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I question if this necessary. You can have entries in fstab with or > > > > without labels. I've had 3 single Fedora installations on single drive > > > > across multiple partitions and never have run into a problem in the > > > > installer or usage nor have I had to manually edit fstab for this. I > > > > think in Anaconda the labels will start shifting to /1, /2, /home1 > > > > etc. Since at runtime you don't deal with partition labels, just their > > > > mount points, it really is not a serious concern. > > > > > > Assume you are in the IT dept for some group and you are used > > > to being able to re-use disks in different machines and to > > > recover data from any disk by installing/mounting in any working > > > machine. Now you find that any combination of disks from > > > default fedora/RH/Centos installs won't boot... It is a > > > problem. > > > > So you boot with a LiveCD or some Rescue disk/media and fix it - use > > the device ID or relabel it. Isn't that the way to fix it? I don't > > understand the problem. Your assumed scenario is too vague. > > > > -Mauriat > We are tying to produce a distribution, are we not, that the uninitiated > can install and it will just work. A lot of things can be fixed but we > want to avoid that. The uninitiated will not likely be moving drives between machines. They would do an install on already existing drives and as such the Fedora install/labeling scheme works well. The conflicts occur when previously labeled drives are mixed in a machine as mentioned above. I agree that it needs to be more capable of recovering but the problem conditions do not appear to be with the new/uninitiated but rather with the users who are moving hardware between machines after the installation has completed for whatever reason. Some OSes write a PVID on the physical device that is unique (similar to the way identifiers on LVM logical volumes and volume groups are unique). This may be a better way since a unique identifier of this sort (physical volume plus logical volume/partition) is guaranteed to not conflict the way the current labels do.
