Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

> > Wonderful, and the situation where there is just enough of a ZFS label that > "zpool add" and "zpool attach" refuses to work, because there is a pool > there; but not enough of a ZFS label for labelclear to work? This situation > is frustrating. https://gist.github.com/evansus/fabf38f0279bd

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

> > I agree, and "zpool labelclear" is going to clear the label. > > "zpool labelclear" is not going to overwrite something that isn't a zpool > label, in part because I haven't heard any use case for it. Wonderful, and the situation where there is just enough of a ZFS label that "zpool add" and

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 09:05:45 +0900, Jorgen Lundman wrote: Having had a handful of disks in this situation, and I had to dd the start and end of the disks to be able to use them again, is rather frustrating. ZFS is supposed to be admin friendly, so we don't have to dick around with partitions and

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Jorgen Lundman wrote: > > Having had a handful of disks in this situation, and I had to dd the start > and end of the disks to be able to use them again, is rather frustrating. > Sounds like exactly the use case for "zpool labelclear". > > ZFS is supposed to be

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

Having had a handful of disks in this situation, and I had to dd the start and end of the disks to be able to use them again, is rather frustrating. ZFS is supposed to be admin friendly, so we don't have to dick around with partitions and dd blanking a disk just because a label got corrupted. (Ev

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

> >> > On Apr 5, 2016, at 8:24 AM, ilovezfs wrote: >> > >> > @richardelling Would you object to not >> having the command at all? >> > >> > > > The command is useful for developers, no question. But it is a loaded gun > and adding more powerful bullets doesn

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 3:41 AM, Andrew Gabriel wrote: > On 03/04/2016 21:28, Josh Paetzel wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Matthew Ahrens wrote: > > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 6:51 AM, Josh Paetzel < > j...@tcbug.org> wrote: > > Does this mean FreeBSD's zpool labelclear is propriet

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

On 03/04/2016 21:28, Josh Paetzel wrote: On Sun, Apr 3, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Matthew Ahrens wrote: On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 6:51 AM, Josh Paetzel > wrote: Does this mean FreeBSD's zpool labelclear is proprietary to FreeBSD? If so I don't suppose the FreeBSD UI co

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

No it's fine. I wonder how many other unmerged things are in FreeBSD. This is exactly why I always lobby to upstream everything. Thanks, Josh Paetzel > On Apr 3, 2016, at 6:10 PM, Yuri Pankov wrote: > > Well, my thought (and I guess same for @ilovezfs) was that -ff (and that's > exactly why

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

On Sun, Apr 3, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Matthew Ahrens wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 6:51 AM, Josh Paetzel wrote: >> Does this mean FreeBSD's zpool labelclear is proprietary to FreeBSD? >> >> If so I don't suppose the FreeBSD UI could be considered? > > It looks like the interface proposed h

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

> I have 2 concerns with -ff: > 1. I think the right flag would be -F, which is more in keeping with the > existing CLI (e.g. see zpool import -f / -F, and zfs receive -F) > 2. I'm not a big fan of making zpool overwrite unknown data. Even zpool create > / zpool add will give a specific warning if

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 6:51 AM, Josh Paetzel wrote: > Does this mean FreeBSD's zpool labelclear is proprietary to FreeBSD? > > If so I don't suppose the FreeBSD UI could be considered? > It looks like the interface proposed here is the same as the FreeBSD "zpool labelclear", with the exception o

Re: [developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 6418 zpool should have a label clearing command (#83)

Does this mean FreeBSD's zpool labelclear is proprietary to FreeBSD? If so I don't suppose the FreeBSD UI could be considered? Thanks, Josh Paetzel > On Apr 2, 2016, at 9:15 PM, ilovezfs wrote: > > @yuripankov Yes! And combined with a partitioning tool you could probably > turn it into a dd