[PATCH 0/1] Add some notes about setting up GuixSD filesystems

[PATCH 0/1] Add some notes about setting up GuixSD filesystems

[Leo Famulari]

At least two people made the same mistake while installing GuixSD in the
last day: me and aeva on #guix both didn't realize that the device field
of the file-system configuration should match the label of the partition
it is describing. This leaves the system unbootable (fixable, but
unbootable).

This patch is an attempt to help users understand the relationship
between their partition labels and the GuixSD file-system configuration.

I adapted /etc/configuration/bare-bones.scm when I made the mistake. I'm
sure many users will adapt these example configurations for their first
installation, so these edits primarily address those users.

Thoughts?

Leo Famulari (1):
  doc: Explain significance of partition labels.

 doc/guix.texi | 7 +++++++
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)

-- 
2.6.2

[PATCH 1/1] doc: Explain significance of partition labels.

[Leo Famulari]

* doc/guix.texi (Preparing for Installation): Point out relationship
between partition labels and the file-system configuration.
---
 doc/guix.texi | 7 +++++++
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)

diff --git a/doc/guix.texi b/doc/guix.texi
index 06d70ba..53a5fd3 100644
--- a/doc/guix.texi
+++ b/doc/guix.texi
@@ -5456,6 +5456,13 @@ reliably refer to them in @code{file-system} declarations (@pxref{File
 Systems}).  This is typically done using the @code{-L} option of
 @command{mkfs.ext4} and related commands.
 
+Be sure that your partition labels match the value of their respective
+@code{device} fields in your @code{file-system} configuration, if your
+@code{file-system} configuration sets the value of @code{title} to
+"label", as do the example configurations found on the USB installation
+image under @code{/etc/configuration} (@pxref{Using the Configuration
+System}).
+
 @c FIXME: Uncomment this once GRUB fully supports encrypted roots.
 @c A typical command sequence may be:
 @c
-- 
2.6.2

Re: [PATCH 1/1] doc: Explain significance of partition labels.

[Ludovic Courtès]

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:

> * doc/guix.texi (Preparing for Installation): Point out relationship
> between partition labels and the file-system configuration.

[...]

> +Be sure that your partition labels match the value of their respective
> +@code{device} fields in your @code{file-system} configuration, if your
> +@code{file-system} configuration sets the value of @code{title} to
> +"label", as do the example configurations found on the USB installation

@code{'label}

> +image under @code{/etc/configuration} (@pxref{Using the Configuration

@file{/etc/configuration}

Otherwise LGTM!

I’ve noticed a number of people who had overlooked the comment in the
configuration examples, so this is a worthy addition.

I wonder if changing the label in the examples from “root” to
“my-root-partition” or similar wouldn’t make it less easily overlooked?

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Re: [PATCH 1/1] doc: Explain significance of partition labels.

[Leo Famulari]

On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 11:16:04PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
> 
> > * doc/guix.texi (Preparing for Installation): Point out relationship
> > between partition labels and the file-system configuration.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > +Be sure that your partition labels match the value of their respective
> > +@code{device} fields in your @code{file-system} configuration, if your
> > +@code{file-system} configuration sets the value of @code{title} to
> > +"label", as do the example configurations found on the USB installation
> 
> @code{'label}
> 
> > +image under @code{/etc/configuration} (@pxref{Using the Configuration
> 
> @file{/etc/configuration}
> 
> Otherwise LGTM!

I fixed those.

> I’ve noticed a number of people who had overlooked the comment in the
> configuration examples, so this is a worthy addition.
> 
> I wonder if changing the label in the examples from “root” to
> “my-root-partition” or similar wouldn’t make it less easily overlooked?

Done in the updated patch.

> 
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.