#49 Issue closed: Get rid of dr and recreate stages altogether

Labels: cleanup

dagwieers opened issue at 2012-03-30 09:21:

Now that the new layout code seems to be working quite well, we can get rid of the old dr and recreate stages.

As part of this cleanup we can get rid of the rear_vol_id wrapper. Please verify that every use of vol_id, udev_volume_id or blkid is covered !

gdha commented at 2012-04-04 14:47:

noticed that in other workflows there are still some symlinks to 'dr' files. Noticed a message during a recovery exercise of Fedora 16 that rear_vol_id was mentioned to be used. Should pay some closer attention in the coming days...

dagwieers commented at 2012-04-04 17:15:

The compatibility library creates the rear_vol_id wrapper based on the tools available on the system. So what you most likely saw was the compatibility library telling you on what tool the rear_vol_id wrapper was based.

Debug "Using 'vol_id' for rear_vol_id"
Debug "Using 'udev_volume_id' for rear_vol_id"
Debug "Using 'blkid' for rear_vol_id"

Apart from the dr code none of the layout-code (or other code) depends on vol_id, blkid or udev_volume_id, which is great because keeping that compatibility alive was hard. We can in fact get rid of the compatibility library (as it has no other purpose than this one).

BTW This wrapper is not new, but was called vol_id before, and that was confusing because in many cases it was not in fact using vol_id :-)

dagwieers commented at 2012-04-04 17:24:

BTW Yes, there are three workflows that still use the dr stage: mkdr, mkrescue and mkbackup

Both mkrescue and mkbackup use the "dr" stage when USE_LAYOUT is not set, I honestly don't know what the purpose is of the mkdr workflow. I think we can get rid of this as well, if everyone agrees that the layout code is an improvement in every use-case over the dr/recreate code.

Note that I propose to clean this up after release v1.14, so we'll do one more release before getting rid of it. Again, if everyone agrees :-) (Personally I don't mind removing it today, less code == less that can fail !)

gdha commented at 2012-04-04 19:14:


dagwieers commented at 2012-04-04 19:18:

In the meantime I have been looking into this and have already made the necessary changes 3 times, however I also lost 3 times all my changes because I cannot make feature-branches work. I lost the changes when doing a checkout, I tried to merge it with origin, committed it to origin/master, to no avail.

Jeroen ? :-)

[Export of Github issue for rear/rear.]