Am 2010-10-31 13:56, schrieb Robert Millan:
So you want me to cherry-pick this non-trivial patch but nobody has
tested it with mdraid 0.9, which I presume is the most widely deployed
version?
just for testing purposes i set up a 0.9 array on my machine:
r...@sow:~# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid1]
md0 : active raid1 sdb4[2](S) sdb3[3](S) sdb2[1] sdb1[0]
10490304 blocks [2/2] [UU]
[>....................] resync = 3.6% (383104/10490304)
finish=15.8min speed=10641K/sec
md125 : active raid1 sda3[0] sdc3[2] sdd3[3](S)
64324188 blocks super 1.0 [2/2] [UU]
md126 : active raid1 sda2[0] sdc2[2] sdd2[3](S)
6297468 blocks super 1.0 [2/2] [UU]
md127 : active raid1 sda1[0] sdc1[2] sdd1[3](S)
1060244 blocks super 1.0 [2/2] [UU]
grub-probe seems to work fine on this device:
r...@sow:~# mount /dev/md0 /mnt
r...@sow:~# /tmp/grub-probe /mnt/
ext2
r...@sow:~# /tmp/grub-probe -t device /mnt
/dev/md0
i coudn't figure out any way to let it crash like the actual debian
binaries...
Or otherwise, someone confirm me it's been tested with 0.9, and
I'll add the patch myself.
btw. -- i did all this tests using patched versions from upstream. it's
perhaps not so trival to backport everything to 1.98+20100804 faultlessly.
if you need any further testing i'll do my best...
but in general i would like to see the upstream development and their
fixes as the most responsible source of improvement.
martin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
