Hi, after a little trial-and-error I now know that (for me) this is the difference between a non-bootable system (for symptoms see my initial mail) and a bootable one:
$ diff -u 3.1.2-2.1/lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules /lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules --- 3.1.2-2.1/lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules 2010-08-25 23:30:07.814576367 +0200 +++ /lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules 2010-08-25 23:47:46.300056953 +0200 @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ ATTR{md/array_state}=="|clear|inactive", GOTO="md_end" LABEL="md_ignore_state" -IMPORT{program}="/sbin/mdadm --detail --export $tempnode" +#IMPORT{program}="/sbin/mdadm --detail --export $tempnode" ENV{DEVTYPE}=="disk", ENV{MD_NAME}=="?*", SYMLINK+="disk/by-id/md-name-$env{MD_NAME}", OPTIONS+="string_escape=replace" ENV{DEVTYPE}=="disk", ENV{MD_UUID}=="?*", SYMLINK+="disk/by-id/md-uuid-$env{MD_UUID}" ENV{DEVTYPE}=="disk", ENV{MD_DEVNAME}=="?*", SYMLINK+="md/$env{MD_DEVNAME}" This seems logical since: a) There were no changes to /lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules between 3.0.3-2 and 3.1.2-2.1: $ md5sum 3.0.3-2/lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules 3.1.2-2.1/lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules 4a574fcd059040d33ea18a8aa605a184 3.0.3-2/lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules 4a574fcd059040d33ea18a8aa605a184 3.1.2-2.1/lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules However the older version works fine, see my previous mail. So it makes sense that line causing the problems is the one actually calling the (changed) mdadm binary. b) This command is what I saw in `top', see `screen7.jpg' from my initial mail. Any thoughts on this? Alexander Kurtz
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part