From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3955D87A.590E9C2C@inet.net.nz> Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 22:01:30 +1200 From: Dale Kemp MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM /dev and /proc problems and change proposal References: <3955A848.D5071D8E@inet.net.nz> <20000625103032.A3124@hmsysv.t-online.de> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-lvm Errors-To: owner-linux-lvm List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Linux LVM mailing list > But It dissallows the user to do it and there's still plenty of free namespace > to find a meaningfull name for the Volume Group. I'm refering to the future when a new device gets added that just might clash with a volume group name that a user has chosen. And we don't know what users are going to call their volume groups and we don't know what device names will be created in the future. > There's a preprocessor definition LVM_DIR_PREFIX in the code, which > supports this already. So I see. The simplest solution is to change this default prefix, and have the lvm stuff self-contained in its own subdirectory. Even without the name clash this is just tidier, already /dev is very wide but not very deep. > I don't like both, because they break the hierarchy of LVs (like virtual > partitions) contained in VGs (like virtual disks containing physical disks). Fair enough :-) Just throwing some ideas around. Can I `propose' that simply by changing the default (LVM_DIR_PREFIX) in the original LVM code and we begin `standardizing' now the LVM directories. eg. /dev/lvm/ (all previuos | +-- lvm [c:109,0] (need to change constant LVM_DIR in "liblvm.h" too] | +-- vdisk1/ | +-- group [c:109,0] +-- lvol1 [b:58,0] +-- lvol2 [b:58,1] > > Also I think there should be a sub-directory for lvm itself in /proc > > ie. /proc/lvm/lvm instead of /proc/lvm. > > Yep. > Already on the TODO list. > I share your point of view in regard to /proc. The need for /proc/lvm/... is simular to that for /dev/lvm/... -- Dale.