also sprach Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.02.0847 +0200]:
> Would combining the drives that went well make sense?
> Starting RAID devices... md0, md1, md4 done
> Starting RAID device md2 ... 2/3 drives, degraded
> Starting RAID device md3 ... 1/3 drives, failed
Nice, but is it wort
On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 02:36:15AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Adam Borowski wrote:
> > The friend muttered something about Ubuntu being as flaky as
> > Windows, then rebooted and started the installation anew...
>
> This is not an Ubuntu mailing list. It's pretty annoying to require all
> us d-
martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.01.2122 +0200]:
>>> Starting RAID device md0 ... 3 drives, done
>>> Starting RAID device md1 ... 3 drives, done
>>> Starting RAID device md2 ... 2/3 drives, degraded
>>> Starting RAID device md3 ... 1/3 drives, failed
Adam Borowski wrote:
> The friend muttered something about Ubuntu being as flaky as
> Windows, then rebooted and started the installation anew...
This is not an Ubuntu mailing list. It's pretty annoying to require all
us d-i developers to get this far down in the mail before we realize
that th
On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 02:44:54AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Matthew R. Dempsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.02.0238 +0200]:
> > > Any suggestions?
> >
> > Submit a feature request to LSB?
>
> And wait 15 years?
Eh, that's only 2 or 3 debian releases from now.
--
To UNSUBSCR
also sprach Matthew R. Dempsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.02.0238 +0200]:
> > Any suggestions?
>
> Submit a feature request to LSB?
And wait 15 years?
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :' :proud Debian de
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 06:51:31PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> Any suggestions?
Submit a feature request to LSB?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
also sprach Arjan Oosting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.01.2307 +0200]:
> It would be nice if the log_action_end_msg would support warnings
> in addition to succes and failures, so the output would clearly
> distinguish a degraded array from a completely succesfully started
> array.
Consider filing
Op do, 01-06-2006 te 22:29 +0200, schreef martin f krafft:
> also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.01.2150 +0200]:
> > Stopping RAID devices... md6 busy; md5 busy; md3 busy; md2 busy; md0
> > busy; md1 busy; failed (6 busy, 1 stopped).
> > Starting RAID devices... md0 running; md
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 06:51:54PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> In my ideal world, this is what it would look like:
>
> Starting RAID devices ...
> /dev/md0 has been started with 3 drives.
> /dev/md1 has been started with 3 drives.
> /dev/md2 assembled from 2 drives - need all 3 to start
also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.01.2150 +0200]:
> Stopping RAID devices... md6 busy; md5 busy; md3 busy; md2 busy; md0
> busy; md1 busy; failed (6 busy, 1 stopped).
> Starting RAID devices... md0 running; md1 running; md2 running; md3
> running; md4 started (3/3); md5 runni
also sprach Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.01.2158 +0200]:
> Starting them individually just seems "better" IMO, more atomic.
Mh, I would have to do config file parsing in the init.d script to
figure out all available devices. mdadm already handles it; it
starts all devices that haven't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.01.2012 +0200]:
>> Starting RAID device md0 ... 3 drives, done
>> Starting RAID device md1 ... 3 drives, done
>> Starting RAID device md2 ... 2/3 drives, degraded
>> St
also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.01.2122 +0200]:
> > Starting RAID device md0 ... 3 drives, done
> > Starting RAID device md1 ... 3 drives, done
> > Starting RAID device md2 ... 2/3 drives, degraded
> > Starting RAID device md3 ... 1/3 drives, failed
> > Starting RAID device
also sprach Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.01.2012 +0200]:
> Starting RAID device md0 ... 3 drives, done
> Starting RAID device md1 ... 3 drives, done
> Starting RAID device md2 ... 2/3 drives, degraded
> Starting RAID device md3 ... 1/3 drives, failed
> Starting RAID device md4 ...
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 06:51:54PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> In my ideal world, this is what it would look like:
>
> Starting RAID devices ...
> /dev/md0 has been started with 3 drives.
> /dev/md1 has been started with 3 drives.
> /dev/md2 assembled from 2 drives - need all 3 to start
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
martin f krafft wrote:
> > also sprach Andreas Fester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.01.1935 +0200]:
>> >> log_action_msg "Starting RAID devices ..."
> >
> > log_action_msg is supposed to be used to log an atomic message,
> > which is not the case the wa
also sprach Andreas Fester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.01.1935 +0200]:
> log_action_msg "Starting RAID devices ..."
log_action_msg is supposed to be used to log an atomic message,
which is not the case the way we/you use it here.
> log_failure_msg "... done assembling RAID devices: failed."
Acc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
martin f krafft wrote:
> I am faced with the problem on how to tackle multiline output from
> an init.d script, which I have just converted to LSB. Since the
> package is mdadm and RAID is kinda essential to those that have it
> configured, I'd rather
On 6/1/06, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I am faced with the problem on how to tackle multiline output from
an init.d script, which I have just converted to LSB. Since the
package is mdadm and RAID is kinda essential to those that have it
configured, I'd rather not hide informat
20 matches
Mail list logo
