severity 417407 important
thanks
At this point, there is a lack of evidence showing that this data loss was
caused by os-prober. There is, however, evidence that the RAID was in an
inconsistent state before debian-installer ever looked at it -- more
inconsistent than the d-i team was able to forc
Hi,
martin f krafft, le Tue 03 Apr 2007 10:28:24 +0200, a écrit :
> And the other question of course is why the kernel decided it had
> any business doing recovery on an fs that was marked for ro mount.
Because it always do so, see linux/fs/ext3/super.c:ext3_load_journal():
even if the mount is r
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 12:25:17PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> After the reboot I again installed mdadm. However, I could not reproduce
> any problems during this: the RAID was not out of sync,
In that case, I would say that the test did not accurately model the
submitter's circumstances.
To incre
On Monday 02 April 2007 18:33, Peter Nuttall wrote:
> D-I questions: I just pressed enter at the prompt, and set my keyboard
> and location to enGB. On reaching the disk stage, I asked it to set up
> hda as a LVM with / /home /tmp and /var on seperate paritions. On
> checking the result seemed to s
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:59:48AM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:39:26AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> >> After the mount, both of sd[ab]1 would have to be recovered and
> >> usable, but out of sync.
> > Actually, as Sesse claims, it's entirely likely that md did
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:39:26AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
>> After the mount, both of sd[ab]1 would have to be recovered and
>> usable, but out of sync.
> Actually, as Sesse claims, it's entirely likely that md didn't think
> the partitions were out of sync. That would explain some pretty ba
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 08:53:24AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Peter Nuttall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.04.03.0020 +0200]:
> > mdadm --assemble /dev/md0 works, as does your command above. The
> > array is fine after resyncing, its just its contents that are
> > gone.
>
> I honestly
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:39:26AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.04.03.1028 +0200]:
> > After the mount, both of sd[ab]1 would have to be recovered and
> > usable, but out of sync.
> Actually, as Sesse claims, it's entirely likely that md did
also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.04.03.1028 +0200]:
> After the mount, both of sd[ab]1 would have to be recovered and
> usable, but out of sync.
Actually, as Sesse claims, it's entirely likely that md didn't think
the partitions were out of sync. That would explain some pretty
also sprach Jim Paris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.04.02.2345 +0200]:
> If those two disks were part of a RAID mirror and they were
> written to individually, they could end up inconsistent, which may
> have caused problems with the RAID later?
Absolutely. Now we need to figure out how to get from he
Hi,
Frans Pop, le Mon 02 Apr 2007 20:07:35 +0200, a écrit :
> Apr 2 10:45:49 os-prober: debug: running /usr/lib/os-probes/50mounted-tests
> on /dev/discs/disc1/part1
> Apr 2 10:45:48 kernel: EXT2-fs: sdb1: couldn't mount because of unsupported
> optional features (4).
> Apr 2 10:45:48 kernel:
also sprach Peter Nuttall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.04.03.0020 +0200]:
> mdadm --assemble /dev/md0 works, as does your command above. The
> array is fine after resyncing, its just its contents that are
> gone.
I honestly have no idea what could have gone wrong. Can you check
whether the array's U
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 11:46:02PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> Can you force-start the degraded array, using something like
>
> mdadm --assemble --auto=yes --force /dev/md0 /dev/sd[ab]1
> mdadm --run /dev/md0
>
> ?
>
> --
> .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> : :' : proud
Frans Pop wrote:
> However, the syslog does show some strange activity while the installer is
> probing for other operating systems:
[...]
> Apr 2 10:45:48 kernel: EXT2-fs: sdb1: couldn't mount because of unsupported
> optional features (4).
> Apr 2 10:45:48 kernel: EXT3-fs: INFO: recovery requi
Can you force-start the degraded array, using something like
mdadm --assemble --auto=yes --force /dev/md0 /dev/sd[ab]1
mdadm --run /dev/md0
?
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :' : proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~
On Monday 02 April 2007 18:33, Peter Nuttall wrote:
> D-I questions: I just pressed enter at the prompt, and set my keyboard
> and location to enGB. On reaching the disk stage, I asked it to set up
> hda as a LVM with / /home /tmp and /var on seperate paritions. On
> checking the result seemed to s
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 06:45:46PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Peter Nuttall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.04.02.1833 +0200]:
> > If you have any questions, or I can help further, please ask. I'm psn on
> > oftc. Any suggestions as to what I did wrong or how to recover would be
> > re
also sprach Peter Nuttall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.04.02.1833 +0200]:
> If you have any questions, or I can help further, please ask. I'm psn on
> oftc. Any suggestions as to what I did wrong or how to recover would be
> really nice.
Please also pass the output of
/usr/share/bug/mdadm/script
18 matches
Mail list logo
