Mount by-label instead of by-id with OMV 5.6.15-1 and btrfs

Quote from MichaelKo

Hi guys,

installing a new HDD in my 2 years old OMV NAS I also experienced the new situation of new mounting points going to be by-id instead of by-label. I don't want to discuss this in general if it's bad or good, there are enough topics here about this. As I am a creature of habit, I just wanted to have my new drive mounted like all my other old drives. Here is a tutorial how I succeed to to this:

1. Make sure you have backups of your system and data. This might destroy your OMV config and data. You should know what you will do. I'm not an linux expert, I just figured out how to solve my issues and it worked. Red text needs to be replaced with your custom values like UUID and label. I tried this on 5.6.15-1 (Usul)
2. Shutdown, insert your new hard drive in your NAS case, boot up again (if not hot swap nas)
3. Wipe the new drive. Login into your OMV UI --> Storage --> Disks --> select the new drive. Make sure all data on the new drive is not needed any more, because this will completely clean your new drive
4. Optional: Encrypt the new drive with the label you desire (LUKS encryption). E.g. mylabel2000. Once created, unlock the drive with you just encrypted
   
5. Create a new filesystem (I am using btrfs) for your new drive and insert the desired label as well. E.g. mylabel2000. But do not mount the new drive!
   
6. Open omv config, e.g.
   
   nano /etc/openmediavault/config.xml
   Search for "<hdparm>". Watch out for the drive you added, it should be listed in one of the <devicefile> elements. Copy the uuid between <uuid> and </uuid>
   
7. Open fstab to add your new drive, e.g.
   nano /etc/fstab
   Insert new line before
   # <<< [openmediavault]
   and insert the following (change the label name mylabel2000 to your defined label):
   /dev/disk/by-label/mylabel2000 /srv/dev-disk-by-label-mylabel2000 btrfs defaults,nofail 0 2
   Save your configuration
8. Open omv config, e.g.
   nano /etc/openmediavault/config.xml
   Search for <fstab>
   Add new drive directly after <fstab>, e.g. (change YOUR_UUID_OF_NEW_DRIVE and mylabel2000 to your defined label name)
   <mntent> <uuid>YOUR_UUID_OF_NEW_DRIVE</uuid> <fsname>/dev/disk/by-label/mylabel2000</fsname> <dir>/srv/dev-disk-by-label-mylabel2000</dir> <type>btrfs</type> <opts>defaults,nofail</opts> <freq>0</freq> <passno>2</passno> <hidden>0</hidden> </mntent>
9. Maybe you need to reboot again,I don't remember if I did this or not
10. Once up and running again, decrypt and after some seconds the mounting should happend automatically

Make sure you have backups and a rollback strategy if something goes wrong!

Best

Michael

Display More

Thanks for this guide. Using your guide was able, last week, to successfully "mount by label" instead of "mount by uuid" new 4TB internal drive in Btrfs. Works like a champ.

Quote from ryecoaaron

A symlink would've been easier.

I am just not a big fan of user created soft links.

Quote from chente

If the vast majority of current distributions (or perhaps all) have chosen to use UUID mounts rather than label mounts, they probably have good reasons for doing so. Don't you think?

You are most likely right. The way I understand (good, bad or indifferent) is that a main reason for this are users that use USB drives and just plug and unplug them without bothering of "mount" and "umount". I guess it is a fact of life, but I am old guy and used to the old fashion ways.

Quote from ryecoaaron

But hacking the database is ok?

It is not really hacking. Just modifying system cofiguration/sttings.

Edit: BTW, it is an open source, right?

Quote from ryecoaaron

Putting a configuration in a database that could never be created by the program is a hack in my book.

Yes. I wasn't saying you can't change what you like. I was just mentioning a symlink might be a better option. There is even a plugin to create it. I'm not sure what open source has to do with it since you can "hack" the Windows registry just as easily.

I guess you have a misunderstanding of the meaning of term "hacking". You do not "hack" Windows registries, you modify and adjust. You do not "hack" open source (hence term "open") scripts.. So I do not like user created soft links, you do. I have no issue with that. You apparently have a issue with anyone that dares to change/modify and or adjust open source settings.

Please let`s finish this conversation as it will lead us to nowhere..