From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1MhkXX-0005Wh-Lj for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 09:33:51 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MhkXV-0005UZ-Fl for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 09:33:49 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MhkXQ-0005Rf-V7 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 09:33:49 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41406 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MhkXQ-0005Rc-PT for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 09:33:44 -0400 Received: from xvm-190-8.ghst.net ([217.70.190.8]:47530 helo=aybabtu.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MhkXQ-0001DW-94 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 09:33:44 -0400 Received: from [192.168.10.10] (helo=thorin) by aybabtu.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MhkXB-0002lo-OR for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 15:33:29 +0200 Received: from rmh by thorin with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MhkXB-0004SZ-7B for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 15:33:29 +0200 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 15:33:29 +0200 From: Robert Millan To: The development of GRUB 2 Message-ID: <20090830133329.GA17120@thorin> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: free as in freedom X-Message-Flag: Worried about Outlook viruses? Switch to Thunderbird! www.mozilla.com/thunderbird X-Debbugs-No-Ack: true User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove has_paritions X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 13:33:49 -0000 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."