Re: [PATCH] Remove has_paritions

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 09:25:15PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> diff --git a/disk/lvm.c b/disk/lvm.c
> index 126b494..59bf2d7 100644
> --- a/disk/lvm.c
> +++ b/disk/lvm.c
> @@ -97,7 +97,6 @@ grub_lvm_open (const char *name, grub_disk_t disk)
>    if (! lv)
>      return grub_error (GRUB_ERR_UNKNOWN_DEVICE, "Unknown LVM device %s", name);
>  
> -  disk->has_partitions = 0;
>    disk->id = lv->number;
>    disk->data = lv;
>    disk->total_sectors = lv->size;

Why would LVM users want to nest partition maps in them?

This makes me think removing has_partitions is not such a good idea.

Actually, LVM is a partition map of sorts.  If we're going to refurbish our
partition handling model, I think we should contemplate the possibility of
LVM (and perhaps swRAID) becoming less ad-hoc.

But that is more an idea for 2.0.  What are our inmediate needs?

-- 
Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."