From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <l.wagner@proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41A4CCE66 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 19 Sep 2023 17:08:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1D173C815 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 19 Sep 2023 17:08:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 19 Sep 2023 17:08:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3922247FE7 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 19 Sep 2023 17:08:22 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <43384cca-f503-416d-ac4c-b9a25e68298a@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2023 17:08:21 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: de-AT, en-US To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>, Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Hannes Laimer <h.laimer@proxmox.com> References: <20230915065457.352953-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> <c6f385fa-70e3-447a-9f2f-1904b539e3b2@proxmox.com> <3dbcf56a-bfb5-4d51-b266-de15fef2db56@proxmox.com> From: Lukas Wagner <l.wagner@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <3dbcf56a-bfb5-4d51-b266-de15fef2db56@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.031 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [fontawesome.com] Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 00/23] add removable datastores X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pbs-devel>, <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel>, <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2023 15:08:54 -0000 On 9/19/23 17:01, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 19/09/2023 um 15:37 schrieb Lukas Wagner: >> - I'm not sure if the USB icon is the best choice for a removable data >> store. it could be a hot plugged SATA disk, iSCSI, etc. - maybe >> change this to something more generic if possible? > > Yeah, USB can be confusing; to avoid decision fatigue I'd suggest one > of: > > - fa-plug (for plug-able) https://fontawesome.com/v4/icon/plug > > - fa-chain-broken (not used anywhere, and it sorta looks like it would > fit but def. more abstract) > https://fontawesome.com/v4/icon/chain-broken > Out of those two I think I'd prefer fa-plug. >> - There is no way to prepare a disk for the use as a removable >> datastore from the UI alone. We can create a GPT partition table and >> create an ext4 partition on it (via 'Directory'), however this creates >> a mount point for the new partition, so it cannot be used any more >> when creating a datastore. Maybe creating the mount point could be >> optional? > > While true and definitively wanted in the longer run, I think this might > be out of scope for this series, to avoid blowing the yak-shaving up too > much ^^ True, I just wanted to mention it. -- - Lukas