[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Remove has_paritions
From: |
Robert Millan |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Remove has_paritions |
Date: |
Sun, 30 Aug 2009 15:33:29 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 09:25:15PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> diff --git a/disk/lvm.c b/disk/lvm.c
> index 126b494..59bf2d7 100644
> --- a/disk/lvm.c
> +++ b/disk/lvm.c
> @@ -97,7 +97,6 @@ grub_lvm_open (const char *name, grub_disk_t disk)
> if (! lv)
> return grub_error (GRUB_ERR_UNKNOWN_DEVICE, "Unknown LVM device %s",
> name);
>
> - disk->has_partitions = 0;
> disk->id = lv->number;
> disk->data = lv;
> disk->total_sectors = lv->size;
Why would LVM users want to nest partition maps in them?
This makes me think removing has_partitions is not such a good idea.
Actually, LVM is a partition map of sorts. If we're going to refurbish our
partition handling model, I think we should contemplate the possibility of
LVM (and perhaps swRAID) becoming less ad-hoc.
But that is more an idea for 2.0. What are our inmediate needs?
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."