[parted-devel] Strange linux-swap name change

[Jim Meyering]

Colin Watson wrote:
> This might be a bit more controversial than my last linux-swap patch.
> :-)

Not that controversial, imho.

> I just noticed due to a comment from Otavio Salvador that linux-swap had
> its name changed to "linux-swap(new)" a while back. I know this was ages
> ago (January 2007!), but I'd like to suggest that this was poorly
> designed, for the following reasons:
>
> Firstly, "old" and "new" is never a good way to name anything. When a
> third format comes along, you either have to rename things or you have
> to cope with "new" not being current any more. I used to live in a place
> called "New Court" which was built in the early 19th century. :-) There
> are perfectly good version numbers for the swap formats, 0 and 1 - why
> not use them?
>
> Secondly, according to mkswap(8) swap v0 has not been supported since
> Linux 2.5.22, and swap v1 has been supported since 2.1.117. In other
> words, just about the entire Linux planet is using swap v1 now. It seems
> wrong to make them all type "(new)" as a sort of code for "the one that
> actually works".
>
> Thirdly, even if you want to call the current swap format something
> other than "linux-swap", it would be most convenient if "linux-swap"
> were supported for input. I suppose this means that people using
> libparted still have to cope with the new name on output (?), but even
> so it would be useful.
>
> Fourthly, linux_swap.c calls the formats "swap_v1" and "swap_v2" in its
> function names, but mkswap uses the options -v0 and -v1 and calls the
> versions thus. This seems eccentric.
>
>
> I think this should be fixed before a 1.9.0 release, before people start
> depending on the new behaviour too much.

I agree, in principle, and will look at the patch next week.
Thanks!