On Tuesday 18 January 2005 09:03, Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess this means sarge won't work "out-of-the-box" with 2.6.11 and
> LVM unless you compile your own kernel (one that doesn't require an
> initrd image), or fix this initrd image.
LVM root can not work without using an init
On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 01:19:39AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Without devfs the syntax of e.g. /proc/partitions changes and anything
> parsing those files needs to adapt back to the old syntax.
That was a bad bug in Linux 2.4 and has been fixed in Linux 2.6 already,
there even devfs kern
Alex Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Some of us have woody running on LVM1... well I have this with 2.4 Debian
> kernel and LVM1. For LVM1 to work with a kernel that has devfs compiled in
> (debian kernels for woody do) then /dev/ has to be a mounted devfs.
>
> For people such as myself sarge a
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> so unless Debian wants to stay with stoneage kernels you're better of
> starting to fix D-I.
We're not going to destabalise d-i by beginning to make large changes to
it, like not using devfs, until sarge is released.
FWIW, the main current d-i release blocker is a lack
Some of us have woody running on LVM1... well I have this with 2.4 Debian
kernel and LVM1. For LVM1 to work with a kernel that has devfs compiled in
(debian kernels for woody do) then /dev/ has to be a mounted devfs.
For people such as myself sarge as it stands will provide a 2.4.27 kernel
with de
[Brian May]
> Whatever happened to the idea of even numbered kernels being
> "stable"?
You didn't get the memo? That's an obsolete standard - the 2.6.x line
of development has been much more aggressive than past stable series,
as far as allowed tree changes, and last July or so (I think it was),
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 10:34:06AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> so unless Debian wants to stay with stoneage kernels you're better of
> starting to fix D-I. That beeing said D-I people have been told
> repeatedly that basing an installer on devfs is a bad idea long time
> ago, but let's no
> "Christoph" == Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> In that case, we should probably drop debian-installer altogether, as it
>> uses DevFS throughout :-)
Christoph> Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt in 2.6.11-rc1:
I would have hoped that they would wait unt
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:29:41PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Monday 17 January 2005 20:34, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > so unless Debian wants to stay with stoneage kernels you're better of
> > starting to fix D-I. That beeing said D-I people have been told
> > repeatedl
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 10:34:06AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt in 2.6.11-rc1:
>
> What: devfs
> When: July 2005
> Files: fs/devfs/*, include/linux/devfs_fs*.h and assorted devfs
> function calls throughout the kernel tree
> Why:It h
On Monday 17 January 2005 20:34, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> so unless Debian wants to stay with stoneage kernels you're better of
> starting to fix D-I. That beeing said D-I people have been told
> repeatedly that basing an installer on devfs is a bad idea long time
> ago, but
> In that case, we should probably drop debian-installer altogether, as it
> uses DevFS throughout :-)
Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt in 2.6.11-rc1:
What: devfs
When: July 2005
Files: fs/devfs/*, include/linux/devfs_fs*.h and assorted devfs
function calls throughout the k
Op ma, 17-01-2005 te 20:03 +1100, schreef Russell Coker:
> Devfs is regarded as obsolete in the kernel source.
>
> The current initrd images produced by initrd-tools does the following for a
> LVM system:
> mount -nt devfs devfs /dev
> vgchange -a y
> umount /dev
>
> This relies on a kernel with
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 08:03:42PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> Devfs is regarded as obsolete in the kernel source.
>
> The current initrd images produced by initrd-tools does the following for a
> LVM system:
> mount -nt devfs devfs /dev
> vgchange -a y
> umount /dev
>
> This relies on a kerne
Devfs is regarded as obsolete in the kernel source.
The current initrd images produced by initrd-tools does the following for a
LVM system:
mount -nt devfs devfs /dev
vgchange -a y
umount /dev
This relies on a kernel with devfs compiled in to boot a system with an LVM
root file system.
I think
15 matches
Mail list logo
