tags 639830 + moreinfo unreproducible thanks On 26.05.2012 13:03, Michael Tokarev wrote: > > When creating initramfs, alternative MD device names (/dev/md/X) apparently > are not handled correctly by mdadm initramfs hook
Ok. After quite some digging I was able to - sort of, anyway - reproduce the problem by using different forms of device names in different places. It still does not fail as described in #639830 -- Chistian, I need some of your help here please. What I noticed is that Christian uses /dev/md/0 in mdadm.conf, and /dev/md0 as root device (in fstab apparently) -- too bad he didn't include configuration details. This is a way to trouble, all usages should be consistent. But even this way, mdadm assembles arrays correctly here, and when asked to assemble /dev/md/0 it creates both md0 and md/0 nodes (the latter being a symlink, according to udev rules). I was able to omit array assembly from initramfs by setting INITRDSTART= (empty) in /etc/default/mdadm. This way, mdadm in initramfs does not assemble any array at all, but --assemble --scan assembles my array (but gives it name md127, even with 0.90 superblock) I can sort of mimick the described failure by using /dev/md0 in mdadm.conf and /dev/md/0 in fstab - this way it does not work, but it actually _never_ works this way -- when mdadm asked to build /dev/md0, it never creates alternative name /dev/md/0; while when asked to create /dev/md/0, both names actually gets created (by udev rules). So I fail to see how the issue can be reproduced, and I need more information. For a start, I need the output from mdadm bugscript which were removed from the initial bugreport, which includes contents of mdadm.conf, INITRDSTART setting and other useful things. Thanks, /mjt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
