On 14 June 2013 10:21, Daniel O'Connor <docon...@gsoft.com.au> wrote:
> > On 14/06/2013, at 17:48, Alban Hertroys <haram...@gmail.com> wrote: > > IMHO it would be helpful to verify what's there first and warn the user > about it if such an operation will overwrite a different type of label than > what is about to get written there. > > Perhaps it should even refuse to write (by issuing an error stating that > there is already a label there - and preferably also what type) until the > label that's already there gets explicitly cleared by the user or until the > command gets forced. > > Does that make sense? > > The problem with this is that then each label tool needs to know about > every other label format you want to detect for.. > Isn't it possible to add such information to labels, so that the tools at least know "who" to ask what they're dealing with? > > If a label format has a checksum then you could ignore a request to nuke > the label if there is no valid checksum (with a flag to force). No idea how > many have checksums though.. > If there is no guaranteed method of identifying "data" on the disk as a label, then you can't warn the user in all cases. That's not particularly helpful for those cases where you can't warn the user. That's possibly a worse situation than what started this thread. -- If you can't see the forest for the trees, Cut the trees and you'll see there is no forest. _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
