* Re: [PATCH] Artop update
2002-05-31 17:30 ` [PATCH] Artop update Martin Dalecki
@ 2002-05-31 18:53 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2002-05-31 18:55 ` Franz Sirl
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Vojtech Pavlik @ 2002-05-31 18:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Dalecki
Cc: Franz Sirl, Vojtech Pavlik, torvalds, linux-kernel, Andries.Brouwer
On Fri, May 31, 2002 at 07:30:33PM +0200, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> Franz Sirl wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > finally I was able to test the new driver and except for the "return 0 instead
> > of dev-irq" typo all was fine. I added a few minor changes based on the
> > discussion with Vojtech though.
>
> Hey cool!
>
> > The hunk to main.c is needed to be able to boot with DEVFS enabled.
>
> Better just don't do devfs :-). But anyway...
>
> Well I'm planing to add kernel version tagging of fstab line enties
> to util-linux. This seems to be the only way to make major/minor
> transitions (and the more I think about it the more I'm convinced
> that they will be unevitable at some not so distant point in time!)
>
> Something along the lines of:
>
> cat /etc/fstab:
>
> /dev/hdc / ext3 v2.4,defaults 1 1
> /dev/sda1
> / ext3 v2.5,defaults 1 1
> LABEL=/boot /boot ext3 defaults 1 2
> /dev/fd0 /mnt/floppy auto noauto,owner 0 0
> # /dev/loop1 /mnt/1 auto noauto,owner 0 0
> # /dev/loop2 /mnt/2 auto noauto,owner 0 0
> none /proc proc defaults 0 0
> none /tmp tmpfs defaults 0 0
> none /dev/pts devpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0
> /dev/hda6 swap swap defaults 0 0
>
>
> Would be *very* convenient for this purpose and solve 99.9999% percent
> of portability problems. Well the above syntax may be the esiest to
> imeplement however the below syntax would be perhaps more palatable:
>
> 2.5:/dev/sda1
> / ext3 ....
>
> Opinnions?
I don't like this much - while it solves a setup where you use both
kernels, it isn't solving a 2.4->2.5 transition for not-really-skilled
users. I think Linus's way is the best here - provide both /dev/sda, ...
and provide also major/minor aliases (which will go away later) as
/dev/hd*
> perhaps a similar adjustments would be required for the kernel root parameter of
> course.
>
> With something along
> root=2.5:/dev/sda1,2.4:/dev/hdc
> one could be living with... The respecive kernel would just pick the entry
> which is matching it's version and be fine.
--
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Artop update
2002-05-31 17:30 ` [PATCH] Artop update Martin Dalecki
2002-05-31 18:53 ` Vojtech Pavlik
@ 2002-05-31 18:55 ` Franz Sirl
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Franz Sirl @ 2002-05-31 18:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Dalecki; +Cc: Vojtech Pavlik, torvalds, linux-kernel, Andries.Brouwer
On Friday 31 May 2002 19:30, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> Franz Sirl wrote:
> > The hunk to main.c is needed to be able to boot with DEVFS enabled.
>
> Better just don't do devfs :-). But anyway...
I like it :-)
> Well I'm planing to add kernel version tagging of fstab line enties
> to util-linux. This seems to be the only way to make major/minor
> transitions (and the more I think about it the more I'm convinced
> that they will be unevitable at some not so distant point in time!)
>
> Something along the lines of:
>
> cat /etc/fstab:
>
> /dev/hdc / ext3 v2.4,defaults 1
> 1 /dev/sda1
> / ext3 v2.5,defaults 1 1
> LABEL=/boot /boot ext3 defaults 1 2
> /dev/fd0 /mnt/floppy auto noauto,owner 0 0
> # /dev/loop1 /mnt/1 auto noauto,owner 0 0
> # /dev/loop2 /mnt/2 auto noauto,owner 0 0
> none /proc proc defaults 0 0
> none /tmp tmpfs defaults 0 0
> none /dev/pts devpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0
> /dev/hda6 swap swap defaults 0 0
>
>
> Would be *very* convenient for this purpose and solve 99.9999% percent
> of portability problems. Well the above syntax may be the esiest to
> imeplement however the below syntax would be perhaps more palatable:
>
> 2.5:/dev/sda1
> / ext3 ....
>
> Opinnions?
Well, the only time I would need something like that is for label/id-less
stuff, with swap being the most annyoing one for me.
> perhaps a similar adjustments would be required for the kernel root
> parameter of course.
Actually I would love to see something like root=LABEL:root_rh_on_40G on the
commandline.
Franz.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread