On 03/15/15 14:59, Jiri B wrote: > On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:24:32AM -0400, Kenneth Westerback wrote: >> Using DUIDs in the installed /etc/fstab has been the default for some time >> now. >> >> We'd like to eliminate the question in the installer and just use >> DUIDs unconditionally. >> >> But first we need to know you are aware of any circumstances where >> people need or prefer to use the non-DUID option when installing? > > iirc nick@ once said he uses /altroot and thus doesn't > use duids. but event it is still the truth it is unusual > setup.
thanks, I can get myself in trouble without your help. ;) (tl;dr version: I'm fine with the installer becoming DUID-only) There are some cases where I like to use non-DUID labels. However, these are all non-standard cases where one has to do manual editing ANYWAY, and thus, switching over to non-DUIDs is a non-issue (and even there, it's usually just a few lines, the rest stay -- and need to stay -- DUID!) Unix-Philosophically speaking, I like non-DUIDs. They are simple things in the /dev directory. One doesn't really have to understand much about OpenBSD to see /dev/sd0h and have some idea what it means. e4fc87e6abfa5e45.h is not so obvious, 'specially to those who have seen Solaris and their c1t2d0s3 style notation which might look superficially similar. One really still needs to understand the non-DUID notation, too, so DUID is One More Thing to learn. It's a step away from the simplicity that has been an OpenBSD trait, and I can't type or remember sixteen characters in a row accurately. BUT as anyone who fiddled with USB disks or softraid has seen, there are issues with non-DUIDs. DUIDs are very important to have, modern systems without it would be ... difficult. And learning them takes about 60 seconds, no big deal. You must be this --> <--- smart to ride this ride. Score, at least to me: Problems solved by DUIDs: lots Problems CREATED by DUIDs: none (that I have found) Lots to zero. I'm more than happy to flip the switch to DUID only in the installer. Nick.
