Bug#351183: [Yaird-devel] Bug#351183: --run does not fix the disk renaming problem

On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Then I'll just lean back and wait for you to do the hard work :-D ok i've got a partial solution... see below. i say "partial" because the following scenario is not quite ideal: - md initially on /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 ... build initrd - another disk w

Bug#351183: [Yaird-devel] Bug#351183: --run does not fix the disk renaming problem

On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 15:48:10 -0700 (PDT) dean gaudet wrote: > On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > ... > > Well, the above puts the test at boot time. That's ugly IMHO. > > > > I'd prefer resolving mdadm features at build time. Something like > > this: > > * Resolve mdadm capabilities i

Bug#351183: --run does not fix the disk renaming problem

On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:55:50 -0700 (PDT) dean gaudet wrote: > On Tue, 6 Jun 2006, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > It is wrong to assume a purely no-older-than-etch system: Imagine > > the process of upgrading from sarge to etch... > > aha... now i understand :) > > what you really need is some sor

Bug#351183: --run does not fix the disk renaming problem

On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: ... > Well, the above puts the test at boot time. That's ugly IMHO. > > I'd prefer resolving mdadm features at build time. Something like this: > * Resolve mdadm capabilities in Plan.pm > * Set some variable (not the version, but flags each capabilit

Bug#351183: --run does not fix the disk renaming problem

On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 02:55:50PM -0700, dean gaudet wrote: > !case "`mdadm --version 2>&1`" in > !mdadm\ -\ v1.[1-9][^0-9]*) > !mdadm --assemble --uuid NAME=uuid> \ > ! NAME=dev> > !;; > !*) > !mdadm -Ac pa

Bug#351183: --run does not fix the disk renaming problem

On Tuesday, 06 June 2006 at 14:55, dean gaudet wrote: > > Can someone come up with a test command that does not mess with actual > > devices, and returns true for versions of mdadm that properly supports > > "-Ac partitions"? Or even better, a complete patch for yaird? > > ok cool... > > well acc

Bug#351183: --run does not fix the disk renaming problem

On Tue, 6 Jun 2006, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > It is wrong to assume a purely no-older-than-etch system: Imagine the > process of upgrading from sarge to etch... aha... now i understand :) what you really need is some sort of weak dependency which implies that if the package is already installed

Bug#351183: --run does not fix the disk renaming problem

On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:13:01 -0400 Jason Lunz wrote: > On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 08:53:45AM -0700, dean gaudet wrote: > > this is why "-Ac partitions" will work... Neil documented this in Thanks alot for the reassuring details. I am convinced now! > I can certainly live with an etch-only solutio

Bug#351183: --run does not fix the disk renaming problem

On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 08:53:45AM -0700, dean gaudet wrote: > please take a look at the README.initramfs file which appears in unstale > mdadm packages ... (such as the 2.4.1-5 that's now in unstable). it says > the following: > > We do not need to create device files for the components which

Bug#351183: --run does not fix the disk renaming problem

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 degra

Bug#351183: --run does not fix the disk renaming problem

[i've cc'd the md/mdadm maintainer so he can chime in if i'm making an error... Neil if you want to see the entire thread it's visible at .] On Tue, 2 May 2006, Jason Lunz wrote: > I agree. Unfortunately, telling mdadm to scan other devi