also sprach Marco d'Itri [2009.07.20.1023 +0200]:
> > 1. use --run to start arrays as soon as possible, or only start an
> > array when it's completely assembled?
> Why wait?
If you run before it's assembled, any additional members added
afterwards will have to be resynchronised.
> > 2. when can
On Jul 20, martin f krafft wrote:
> 1. use --run to start arrays as soon as possible, or only start an
> array when it's completely assembled?
Why wait?
> 2. when can we assume that the arrays are ready to be started?
When all members have appeared.
> 3. how does the rest of the operating syste
also sprach Marco d'Itri [2009.07.19.2309 +0200]:
> > Really? So is /usr/share/initramfs-tools/scripts/local-top/mdadm
> > (from the mdadm package) wrong, or something else buggy or broken by
> > design? I also experienced the need for udevsettle when booting from
> > LVM over partitioned multip
On Jul 19, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> > If you need udevsettle anywhere else than after running udevtrigger then
> > something is either buggy or broken by design.
> Really? So is /usr/share/initramfs-tools/scripts/local-top/mdadm
> (from the mdadm package) wrong, or something else buggy or broken b
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Jul 19, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>
>> Now that a kernel (and initramfs-tools) maintainer gave the
>> explanation you requested, how do you think we could proceed with
>> this?
>
> As I explained, I will consider this after I will have finished the next
> uplo
On Jul 19, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> Now that a kernel (and initramfs-tools) maintainer gave the
> explanation you requested, how do you think we could proceed with
> this?
As I explained, I will consider this after I will have finished the next
upload.
> I'd like to add that udevsettle calls are a
maximilian attems writes:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:55:40PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
>> On Jun 25, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>>
>>> Any word on this?
>>
>> I'd like to get an explanation from the kernel maintainers about why
>> this would be needed (and it would be needed in my package).
>
>
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:55:40PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jun 25, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>
> > Any word on this?
> I'd like to get an explanation from the kernel maintainers about why
> this would be needed (and it would be needed in my package).
>
your package ships the udev initramfs h
Ferenc Wagner writes:
> So I'm back again, with the below patch running fine on a couple of
> our production machines for a couple of months now. Please consider
> incorporating it in some form.
>
> --- /usr/share/initramfs-tools/scripts/init-premount/udev 2009-04-15
> 23:05:42.0 +0
On Jun 25, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> Any word on this?
I'd like to get an explanation from the kernel maintainers about why
this would be needed (and it would be needed in my package).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Ferenc Wagner writes:
> m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>
>> On Mar 22, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>>
>>> I really hoped you'd provide some pointers how to attack this best, or
>>
>> I have never used this feature. If you are not totally sure about what
>> you are doing please refrain from dumpin
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Mar 22, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>
>> I really hoped you'd provide some pointers how to attack this best, or
>
> I have never used this feature. If you are not totally sure about what
> you are doing please refrain from dumping a probable grave bugs generator
Ian McDonald writes:
> Have you seen bug 501969?
Yes, superficially, but the issue isn't specific to LILO. And it
won't be solved by changing what you wait for, unless your root device
is a bare partition, because RAID and LVM activation isn't
periodically rerun while polling for the root devic
On Mar 22, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> I really hoped you'd provide some pointers how to attack this best, or
I have never used this feature. If you are not totally sure about what
you are doing please refrain from dumping a probable grave bugs generator
on me... :-)
> if [ -d /sys/bus/scsi ]; then
I
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Mar 22, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>
>> necessary devices to appear. Of course not all systems have a SCSI
>> bus, so some extra cleverness would also be required. But this is a
>
> So submit a proper, tested and complete patch...
Ah. Is that all? :) Compl
On Mar 22, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> necessary devices to appear. Of course not all systems have a SCSI
> bus, so some extra cleverness would also be required. But this is a
So submit a proper, tested and complete patch...
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Mar 22, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>
>> devices, btw. How do you feel about including something like this?
>
> I am not aware of this issue. Do you have a patch?
This is what I usually employ:
$ cat /etc/initramfs-tools/scripts/init-premount/scsi_wait_scan
On Mar 22, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> devices, btw. How do you feel about including something like this?
I am not aware of this issue. Do you have a patch?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> It changed a lot, so I wonder if it breaks d-i.
Speaking of this, maybe we could try to get rid of a good bunch of
rootdelay issues with your help. I talked about this with maks on
#debian-kernel, and he suggested that udev should load scsi_wait_scan
in /us
19 matches
Mail list logo
