From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55550 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750955AbaKXPqM (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Nov 2014 10:46:12 -0500 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 16:46:04 +0100 From: Karel Zak To: Phillip Susi Cc: Drake Wilson , util-linux@vger.kernel.org, 770211@bugs.debian.org Subject: Re: LUKS partition types, redux Message-ID: <20141124154604.GA2610@x2.net.home> References: <546D0495.2030803@dasyatidae.net> <20141124113733.GC926@x2.net.home> <547343EA.6090606@ubuntu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <547343EA.6090606@ubuntu.com> Sender: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 09:42:50AM -0500, Phillip Susi wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 11/24/2014 6:37 AM, Karel Zak wrote: > > The current trend is to use partition type to define for what > > purpose we want to use the partition (for example "this is /home") > > independently on partition format. > > I wouldn't call this bone headed idea of redhat's a trend. Using > partition table type codes to decide to auto mount in particular parts > of the filesystem is such a brain damaged idea, those who thought it > up need beaten with a clue-by-four and its use needs to be *strongly* > discouraged. well, it's designed for auto-generated fstab-less systems like containers/virt images, etc. I'm not big fan of this feature, but for some use cases it makes sense. (And it's systemd upstream decision.) Anyway, use partition type for "usage" makes more sense than for "fs-type". Karel -- Karel Zak http://karelzak.blogspot.com