Hello again, Rich (and everybody else who answered me). On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 08:36:27AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Alan Mackenzie <a...@muc.de> wrote: > > So, what was it that chewed up my RAID configuration so badly that > > /dev/md6 got renamed to /dev/md127? Can I change it back to /dev/md6, > > somehow? Do I need to bother?
> I ran into similar issues a while back. In my case some of my arrays > were using older metadata (which was required at the time to boot > without an initramfs). Older metadata being, presumably, 0.90? I have 0.90 too, also so that my kernel will assemble my RAID root partition. I don't won't an initramfs either. > I suspect that either this metadata lacked the info needed for a boot > CD to assign the same ID, or perhaps the ID I was using was already > allocated somehow and the boot CD chose another one and wrote that ID > to the metadata so that it stuck. Something like this, yes. But the metadata MUST have contained "/dev/md6" somewhere - how else could the kernel recreate the right device? > My solution was to move to using UUIDs or labels for everything and > not relying on array numbering. This of course requires an initramfs > - personally I've found Dracut to be the best one out there. It is > just far less prone to breakage when some update causes stuff to move > around like this. But I don't want an initramfs. ;-) Specifying the root partition as "/dev/md6" (or, now, "/dev/md127") also feels like the Right Thing. Anyhow, I've reported this to bugs.gentoo.org as bug #539162. We'll see what comes out of it. > -- > Rich -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
