Andreas Dilger writes:
> Andries writes:
> > > I've implemented a patch for util-linux-2.11a
> > > which adds LABEL support to mkswap(8) and swapon/swapoff(8).
> >
> > But I would prefer a somewhat more ambitious approach.
> >
> > My first thought was: why label individual swap partitions
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> The real problem is that our disks usually do not have a volume label.
> Outside of all file systems.
> The "signatures" that we rely on today are located in different places,
> so that a filesystem can have several valid signatures at the same time.
> A
Andries writes:
> > I've implemented a patch for util-linux-2.11a
> > which adds LABEL support to mkswap(8) and swapon/swapoff(8).
>
> But I would prefer a somewhat more ambitious approach.
>
> My first thought was: why label individual swap partitions?
> I almost never want to distinguish swap
> I've implemented a patch for util-linux-2.11a
> which adds LABEL support to mkswap(8) and swapon/swapoff(8).
Yes, maybe a reasonable idea.
But I would prefer a somewhat more ambitious approach.
My first thought was: why label individual swap partitions?
I almost never want to distinguish swap
4 matches
Mail list logo
