Re: Partitioned loop device..

[Kevin Corry <kevcorry@us.ibm.com>]

On Wednesday 16 July 2003 03:59, Dimitry V. Ketov wrote:
> > There is no difference. What makes /dev/loop1a worse than
> > /dev/hda1? It's just block devices, that's it.
>
> Yes, it is. But I meant its still impossible to use legacy fdisk to
> create that DM mapped partitions (or am I wrong?)

The program fdisk does not know about Device-Mapper. It only reads and writes 
DOS partition tables, and leaves it up to the kernel block-layer to provide 
the corresponding block devices. Other tools are available that use the same 
partitioning format and work with Device-Mapper.

> > I have hopes that the entire partitioning code etc will be
> > ripped out in 2.7 in favour of full userspace discovery + DM,
> > and that MD will hit the same fate...
>
> MD - did you mean metadisks (software raids?)

Yes. Software RAID devices are currently handled by the MD driver, but much of 
that functionality could be ported to Device-Mapper. RAID-linear and RAID-0 
can already be supported in DM, and the latest DM release from Sistina has a 
module to support RAID-1. So all that's left is to port the RAID-5 code to a 
DM module, and modify the user-space tools.

-- 
Kevin Corry
kevcorry@us.ibm.com
http://evms.sourceforge.net/