Re: RFC: Possible (partial) solution for device persistence issue

2006-10-18 Thread David Härdeman
On Wed, October 18, 2006 11:32, Geert Stappers said: > P: /block/hda > N: hda > S: disk/by-id/ata-IC25N020ATMR04-0_MRG108K1HJSLPH > S: disk/by-path/pci-0.0001f000:ata-4-ide-0:0 >... > I think that "by-path" is the presistent thing I want (expect that it is > long) I think in general the by-id path

Re: RFC: Possible (partial) solution for device persistence issue

2006-10-18 Thread Geert Stappers
Op 17-10-2006 om 16:36 schreef dann frazier: > On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 11:59:15PM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > > Please provide names of such tools. (TIA) > > udev - see /dev/by-id, etc. Doing `udevinfo -e` got me: P: /block/hda N: hda S: disk/by-id/ata-IC25N020ATMR04-0_MRG108K1HJSLPH S: di

Re: RFC: Possible (partial) solution for device persistence issue

2006-10-17 Thread dann frazier
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 11:59:15PM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > Please provide names of such tools. (TIA) udev - see /dev/by-id, etc. -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: RFC: Possible (partial) solution for device persistence issue

2006-10-17 Thread Geert Stappers
Op 17-10-2006 om 17:10 schreef maximilian attems: > On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 04:27:19PM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > > Dear Kernel developers, > > > > Your work is appriceated, but I have a request: > > > > Please allow reproducable hardware detection. > > > > As systemadministrator I can't a

Re: RFC: Possible (partial) solution for device persistence issue

2006-10-17 Thread maximilian attems
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 04:27:19PM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > Op 16-10-2006 om 00:06 schreef Frans Pop: > > On Sunday 15 October 2006 23:45, Geert Stappers wrote: > > > The thing I would like to see is that the _difference_ in device naming > > > between d-i kernel plus fellows and installed ke

Re: RFC: Possible (partial) solution for device persistence issue

2006-10-17 Thread Geert Stappers
Op 16-10-2006 om 00:06 schreef Frans Pop: > On Sunday 15 October 2006 23:45, Geert Stappers wrote: > > The thing I would like to see is that the _difference_ in device naming > > between d-i kernel plus fellows and installed kernel plus fellows is > > solved. > > See the discussions that we have h

Re: RFC: Possible (partial) solution for device persistence issue

2006-10-15 Thread Frans Pop
On Sunday 15 October 2006 23:45, Geert Stappers wrote: > The thing I would like to see is that the _difference_ in device naming > between d-i kernel plus fellows and installed kernel plus fellows is > solved. See the discussions that we have had about this in the past. The culprit is the kernel/u

Re: RFC: Possible (partial) solution for device persistence issue

2006-10-15 Thread Eugeniy Meshcheryakov
15 жовтня 2006 о 23:45 +0200 Geert Stappers написав(-ла): > Infact I don't understand why device naming does differ. AFAIK are the > d-i kernel and the installed kernel from the same build. That d-i uses > different tools (busybox, libc?) then installed kernel, will have it > good reason. But it is

Re: RFC: Possible (partial) solution for device persistence issue

2006-10-15 Thread Geert Stappers
Op 15-10-2006 om 19:06 schreef Frans Pop: > I have written a very simple (or at least small) script intended to be run > during finish-install that converts devices listed in /target/etc/fstab > from regular device names to uuids (as far as possible). > > Although this is not a perfect solution,

RFC: Possible (partial) solution for device persistence issue

2006-10-15 Thread Frans Pop
I have written a very simple (or at least small) script intended to be run during finish-install that converts devices listed in /target/etc/fstab from regular device names to uuids (as far as possible). Although this is not a perfect solution, I feel it is an acceptable solution for Etch. By d