On Tuesday, 06 June 2006 at 08:53, dean gaudet wrote:
> On Mon, 29 May 2006, Brendan Cully wrote:
>
> > So I vote heartily to add --run to the yaird mdadm template. Patch
> > attached for your convenience.
>
> i think --run is a bad idea... the docs say nothing about it helping to
> start a degraded array:
>
> Insist that mdadm run the array, even if some of the components
> appear to be active in another array or filesystem. Normally
> mdadm will ask for confirmation before including such components
> in an array. This option causes that question to be suppressed.
That's run in the "for create, build, or grow" section of the
manual. If you keep going to the "for assemble" section, you'll find
this:
-R, --run
Attempt to start the array even if fewer drives were given
than are needed for a full array. Normally if not all
drives are found and --scan is not used, then the array
will be assembled but not started. With --run an attempt
will be made to start it anyway.
If that also sounds a little suspect, further down find this:
Normally the array will be started after it is assembled. How-
ever if --scan is not given and insufficient drives were listed
to start a complete (non-degraded) array, then the array is not
started (to guard against usage errors). To insist that the
array be started in this case (as may work for RAID1, 4, 5, 6, or
10), give the --run flag.
> i'm skeptical that at this point in boot any of the components would be
> in use anywhere else since we're trying to construct the root filesystem.
>
> Brendan did you test this patch? from your description it sounds like
> you had fixed your problem from a rescue disk before developing the patch...
If I remember correctly, what I actually did was:
- I booted from a rescue disk
- let it rebuild for a while
- got impatient to run debian again
- unpacked the debian ramdisk, added --run by hand, repacked it
- rebooted and found peace.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
