From: Hullen@t-online.de (Helmut Hullen)
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Option LABEL
Date: 03 Jan 2013 21:18:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CO8jDv4uCXB@helmut.hullen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130103192848.GD19051@carfax.org.uk>
Hallo, Hugo,
Du meintest am 03.01.13:
[...]
>>> Trying to use filesystem labels to give unique and stable device
>>> IDs is the wrong tool for the job.
>> I beg to differ. On my machines it's the simpliest way, and it's a
>> sure way.
> No, because *it* *doesn't* *work*. This is not a bug. This is how
> things have always behaved -- you're relying on an assumption (one FS
> per device) which simply isn't true any longer.
No - I don't rely on such an assumption.
In the special case I'm just working with I want to use the whole disk
only for btrfs.
In other cases I work with partitions, and there is just the same
problem: at least "blkid" and "findfs" don't work when more than 1
device has the same label (p.e. /dev/sda3 and /dev/sdc5).
>> And how is the way for a system which doesn't use "udev"?
> There isn't one ready-made. Your options are:
> * run udev
> * write something which uses (e.g.) SMART information on block
> devices to extract a unique ID, and convert that into a stable
> device label (which is effectively what udev does)
Sorry - I don't need the "unique ID" for the machines. I can use (p.e.)
e2label /dev/sda3 Var
for labelling an ext2/3/4 partition. Works like a charm, especially for
USB disks.
> * find some piece of the device which isn't going to be overwritten
> by partition tables, GPTs, filesystems, or other kinds of
> metadata, and write your label into there; again, you will need to
> develop your own tool for reading/writing this information
Sorry - that's not necessary. When I connect the disk then I can search
with "findfs" without having mounted any partition.
>> Labelling via "btrfs filesystem label <device> <label>" works well.
> Clearly it doesn't, because you're having problems with it.
No - not at all!
I've only problems when I use the "-L" option of "mkfs.btrfs" together
with more than 1 device in the "mkfs.btrfs" command.
> The
> behaviour where only one device in the FS gets the label, immediately
> after a btrfs label command, is a bug -- *all* of the devices in the
> FS should get the label. You're trying to rely on the behaviour of a
> bug, not on the designed behaviour of the system.
What works:
Building the filesystem with "mkfs.btrfs", without the "-L" option
Then (p.e.)
btrfs filesystem label <device> <label>
(unmounted system)
Then I can check the existence (not only for btrfs formatted disks) with
findfs LABEL=<label> && mount LABEL=<label> <mountpoint>
As mentioned: works not only with btrfs, works fine especially for USB
disks. I don't need any UUID etc. for this way of identyfying. I don't
need to change the mount directive when I change a smaller disk to a
bigger disk.
Viele Gruesse!
Helmut
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-03 20:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-03 15:14 Option LABEL Helmut Hullen
2013-01-03 16:08 ` Hugo Mills
2013-01-03 16:29 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-03 17:01 ` Hugo Mills
2013-01-03 17:43 ` james northrup
2013-01-03 17:57 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-03 18:10 ` cwillu
2013-01-03 18:20 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-03 19:18 ` Chris Murphy
2013-01-03 19:35 ` Chris Murphy
2013-01-03 20:28 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-03 21:23 ` Hugo Mills
2013-01-03 21:27 ` Chris Murphy
2013-01-03 22:07 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-03 21:52 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-06 16:02 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2013-01-04 12:11 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-04 20:59 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-04 21:41 ` Chris Murphy
2013-01-03 19:59 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-03 21:17 ` Chris Murphy
2013-01-04 12:56 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-03 18:33 ` Hugo Mills
2013-01-03 19:08 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-03 19:28 ` Hugo Mills
2013-01-03 20:18 ` Helmut Hullen [this message]
2013-01-05 11:36 ` Martin Steigerwald
2013-01-05 12:44 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-05 19:08 ` Chris Murphy
2013-01-05 13:15 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-05 19:10 ` Chris Murphy
2013-01-05 19:13 ` Hugo Mills
2013-01-05 21:03 ` Helmut Hullen
2013-01-05 21:21 ` Chris Murphy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CO8jDv4uCXB@helmut.hullen.de \
--to=hullen@t-online.de \
--cc=helmut@hullen.de \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.