limetech Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Currently, any device that does not mount is marked as being 'Unformatted', causing the webGui to present a 'Format' button. Normally this is correct because the only way a mount should fail is if indeed there is no recognized file system present. However "stuff happens" and for whatever reason if a valid disk should ever not mount, there is possibility of user clicking that Format button and wiping out their file system. We are therefore adding additional safeguards as follows. - If the MBR of the disk is entirely all zeros OR if the MBR of the disk has the "precleared" signature present, then will will go ahead and mark device as "Unformated" and present the Format button. - If the MBR is not the above, but device does not mount, we mark the device with a new status, call it "Unformatted*". Devices marked Unformatted* will not be included with those marked Unformatted. Instead, user can click on device info page for that device and learn why unraid thinks it's unformatted. We also are adding a button called 'Wipe FS' which will wipe any file system from a device and clear the MBR. This can be used to change a device Unformatted* status to Unformatted. Link to comment
WeeboTech Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 new status, call it "Unformatted*". Devices marked Unformatted* Wouldn't unmountable be a better status? The device could be formatted, but unmountable due to unclean shutdown. Unformatted and Unformatted* Seem too close to one another to help discern the real state Link to comment
garycase Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Agree with WeeboTech => the names are too close. Link to comment
limetech Posted August 23, 2014 Author Share Posted August 23, 2014 Agree with WeeboTech => the names are too close. How about instead of Unformatted we have [glow=red,2,300][shadow=red,left]Unformatted[/shadow][/glow] Yeah I wasn't really going to use unformatted*, just a placeholder. Link to comment
NAS Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Agree with WeeboTech => the names are too close. I had to read it twice to spot the difference. You absolutely cant use these two names they are too close. unmountable is WAY better Link to comment
garycase Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Based on Tom's latest comment, I think it's clear his original suggestion for an alternate name was a big "tongue-in-cheek" Not sure just what he'll really use, but I think it's safe to say it will also NOT be [glow=red,2,300][shadow=red,left]Unformatted[/shadow][/glow] Link to comment
Joe L. Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 ' Agree with WeeboTech => the names are too close. How about instead of Unformatted we have [glow=red,2,300][shadow=red,left]Unformatted[/shadow][/glow] Yeah I wasn't really going to use unformatted*, just a placeholder. how about "not mounted" or "cannot be mounted" Link to comment
jumperalex Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 "mount failed" How about a poll Link to comment
dalben Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 How about "a drive formally known as unmounted" Link to comment
jumperalex Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 How about "a drive formally known as unmounted" fixed that for ya Link to comment
zoggy Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 maybe the term that could be used from unraid's perspective is claimed / unclaimed? Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.