Disabled Intel SATA bug policy (Bug #117314)

[Sitsofe Wheeler]

On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 09:37 +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 11:43 +0100, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
> 
> > Are people that relabeled their partitions with /dev/h??? syntax (rather 
> > than UUIDs) going to get notice that things are going back the other 
> > way? Are people whose systems were allegedly fixed going to be 
> > forewarned that they may be broken again?
> > 
> Could you point out where this was advocated as a fix?  The only
> supported configuration for /etc/fstab is using UUID= and LABEL= for all
> devices.

The only place I can currently find that people actively advocating this
is the forum (e.g.
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=456662&page=6 ). It's hard to
retrace all the pages I've seen though as this topic has become very
popular and consequently I've looked at a lot of different pages related
to it.

> Hard-coded names such as /dev/hd?? and /dev/sda?? are inherently
> unstable, as they are prone to change by not just driver changes, but
> also hardware changes inside the computer (or even timing changes based
> on sun spots).

I'm aware of this but those pesky /dev/<blockdev> names have infested
Ubuntu in a deep seated way. The machine I am using at the moment had a
fresh install of Feisty (via the alternate CD) but has a resume device
set to RESUME=/dev/hda6 in /etc/initramfs-tools/conf.d/resume . On the
same machine all the partitions have UUIDs, but the CDROM/DVD device is
still being referred by /dev/hdc (nor is referencing CD/DVD/Floppy disk
drives in this fashion uncommon with fresh Feisty installs). I've
suggested people use the /dev/cdrom symlink in bugs like
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-source-2.6.20/+bug/118188 but I have no idea whether this advice is good or whether it produces unwanted side effects.

Further, /dev/<blockdev> names still have a hold on hddtemp
( https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hddtemp/+bug/117621 ) along
with dmcrypt+LUKS
( https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-source-2.6.20/+bug/117979 ) not to mention things like /boot/grub/device.map along with who knows what else. There is also an issue surrounding swap and UUIDs ( https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/118199 ).

I've just done some more searching and I neither of the two release
notes for either Edgy ( https://wiki.ubuntu.com/EdgyReleaseNotes ) nor
Feisty ( http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/releasenotes/704 ) mention
that /dev/<blockdev> names should no be used in configuration files.
Contrast this with the latest Fedora release notes
(http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/f7/en_US/sn-Installer.html#id3152635 ). I mentioned it in my previous mail but I'm going to ask again - is it possible to have a second set of release notes that has similar technical information to the Fedora release notes within it?

-- 
Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/