Syslinux - Jul 2016 - [PATCH] : Adding dlabel option to chain.c32

On 06/30/16 14:19, Ady Ady via Syslinux wrote:
> 
> BTW, any suggestions for an alternative name for this option, instead 
> of "dlabel"?
>  
"disklabel"

	-hpa

> On 06/30/16 14:19, Ady Ady via Syslinux wrote:
> > 
> > BTW, any suggestions for an alternative name for this option, instead 
> > of "dlabel"?
> >  
> 
> "disklabel"
> 
> 	-hpa
> 
> 
IMO, naming this option "disklabel" is not the best idea. The term, 
"disklabel", suggests different possible things to users, depending on
what the user is looking for / having in mind; for instance, think 
about the term in *BSDs vs. fdisk's output, and vs. the intention of 
this patch.

In this suggested new option, the 'label' belongs to a partition (not a 
disk), and the partition _might_ be involved in the booting process, or 
it might optionally not. The media to be chained to is _selected_ by 
the label of a partition, and then the chainloading is performed to the 
relevant _disk_ (not the partition).

In other words, the process is two-fold; first the selection, by a 
certain parameter, and then the actual chainloading, to a media that is 
related to the first selection step but only indirectly. The relevance 
of _two_ (somewhat "separated") devices should better be part of the 
naming, so to avoid potential confusions and misunderstanding by users, 
also allowing for future two-fold options with clear naming 
conventions.


@Peter, Erwan, Gene, Michal, (and anyone else interested)...

Although I haven't actually tested Erwan's patch, would it be 
acceptable by you (all) if I were to send a patch to this Syslinux 
Mailing List with the same code while changing the wording as I 
previously suggested in a prior email? Would it be OK to use 
"diskbypartitionlabel" as name of the option? At any rate, the credit 
should go to Erwan; I am just trying to help so to actually make the 
push for it.

Regards,
Ady.

On 07/14/16 05:56, Ady Ady via Syslinux wrote:
> 
> @Peter, Erwan, Gene, Michal, (and anyone else interested)...
> 
> Although I haven't actually tested Erwan's patch, would it be 
> acceptable by you (all) if I were to send a patch to this Syslinux 
> Mailing List with the same code while changing the wording as I 
> previously suggested in a prior email? Would it be OK to use 
> "diskbypartitionlabel" as name of the option? At any rate, the
credit
> should go to Erwan; I am just trying to help so to actually make the 
> push for it.
> 
You're right, in fact, I misinterpreted it exactly this way!

I would suggest "diskwithpartlabel" as a reasonable contraction of
"disk
with partition label".

And yes, let's push it out.

	-hpa