CentOS and LVM partitions

[Matt Graham]

After a long battle with technology, der.hans wrote:
> Am 21. Sep, 2007 schwzte Craig White so:
> > suit yourself - bear in mind that Red Hat really really likes to use
> > 'File system labels' for mounting (as you noted in /etc/fstab) and
> > therefore, when you manually partition, make sure you use sensible label
> > names so Red Hat can keep track.
> The installer is still adding and using labels. I'm also moving everything
> over to labels anyway. How do you read and assign labels to LVM
> partitions?

You don't.  A partition of type 0x8e typically has one PV in it.  The PV 
belongs to a VG.  A VG has one or more LVs in it.  The LVs are roughly 
equivalent to ordinary disk partitions; you make filesystems within the LVs.  
You can run e2label or tune*fs on an LV.  When I did this for a multiboot 
64/32-bit system, I had LVs named /dev/vg/usr32 and /dev/vg/usr64.  Their 
ext3 labels were "usr32" and "usr64", even though I never mounted by label.

> > the concept of using labels instead of devices comes from the notion
> > that bios alterations, SAN systems, etc. will present drives to the
> > system in varying ways but a label never changes.
> Yeah, I like them :).

...then you have situations like installing CentOS 3 and CentOS 4 to different 
disks on the same system without changing the installer's defaults.  So you 
have 2 filesystems with LABEL="root" (or something) and stupidity ensues.  I 
haven't done this but people on comp.os.linux.misc have.  (This means that at 
some point, they'll move from mount-by-label to mount-by-UUID, and that'll be 
fairly icky and incomprehensible.)

-- 
   Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft.  That will just be a
   completely unintentional side effect. 
      --Linus Torvalds
There is no Darkness in Eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see