On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Jogi Hofmüller wrote:
> Am 2013-10-18 12:42, schrieb Jogi Hofmüller:
>> Am 2013-10-18 10:35, schrieb Jesse Molina:
>>>
>>> As previously noted, this was a bug in mdadm and has already been fixed
>>> in the current version. Just update your mdadm package and then
>>
Dear all,
I tried using linux-image-3.11-1 from sid today and got the same result.
No RAID is created. I really don't know where to start looking now.
Any ideas? Wrong list?
Regards!
Am 2013-10-18 12:42, schrieb Jogi Hofmüller:
Hi jesse,
Am 2013-10-18 10:35, schrieb Jesse Molina:
As p
Hi jesse,
Am 2013-10-18 10:35, schrieb Jesse Molina:
>
> As previously noted, this was a bug in mdadm and has already been fixed
> in the current version. Just update your mdadm package and then
> re-build your initramfs file with the "update-initramfs" command. Be
> sure to read the manpage fo
As previously noted, this was a bug in mdadm and has already been fixed
in the current version. Just update your mdadm package and then
re-build your initramfs file with the "update-initramfs" command. Be
sure to read the manpage for that command. Probably "update-initramfs
-u" alone will
Dear all,
We ran into the same (or a similar) problem yesterday and could not fix
it until now. The machine in question was setup using wheezy and then
upgraded to jessie. Since the only kernel 3.2 will boot, anything else
fails.
The setup is as follows:
* one raid10
* lvm lvs for / /boot
/et
Hi everyone,
just wanting to point out that this is biting me as well (Debian sid,
first dist-upgrade since about a week). I am wondering if the
problem is not a bit further up the chain ..:
I have two physical disks, partitions on which are either raid0 or raid1
managed by mdadm. Looking at my
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Jesse Molina wrote:
> On 10/12/13 2:40 AM, Jesse Molina wrote:
>>
>> I have a Debian unstable host which successfully boots from the
>> linux-image-3.10-1-amd64 kernel package. However, I recently installed the
>> linux-image-3.10-3-amd64 kernel package, and it is
This is confimed bug # 726237. It's actually mdadm. Bad udev rule file.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=726237
On 10/12/13 2:40 AM, Jesse Molina wrote:
Hi
I have a Debian unstable host which successfully boots from the
linux-image-3.10-1-amd64 kernel package. However,
Sven Hartge wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Can you verify that the UUID of your root device and the UUID that
> > doesn't boot on grub's kernel command line are the same?
> > ...
> > Can you check to see if they do or do not match on your system? I
> > suspect that they do not match and that is wh
Bob Proulx wrote:
> The UUIDs match. All is good. Can you check to see if they do or do
> not match on your system? I suspect that they do not match and that
> is why the system will not boot. Because if they match then it should
> work. This is the default when booting Debian Wheezy on inst
Bob Proulx wrote:
> Sven Hartge wrote:
>> I have the same problem as Jesse, roughly since the update to
>> mdadm-3.3 in Sid.
> I am using mdadm 3.3-1 in Sid on the machine I am typing this on now.
> But I am using LVM which might be the difference. With LVM the UUIDs
> are present but are one l
Sven Hartge wrote:
> I have the same problem as Jesse, roughly since the update to mdadm-3.3
> in Sid.
I am using mdadm 3.3-1 in Sid on the machine I am typing this on now.
But I am using LVM which might be the difference. With LVM the UUIDs
are present but are one layer deeper in the LVM PV laye
Bob Proulx wrote:
> Jesse Molina wrote:
>> As I said before, the md RAIDs are being assembled. udev, or
>> something else, is failing to properly create the device nodes.
> A shot in the dark but... Have you added a new md device recently but
> forgotten to update the /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf fil
I did the following today:
Indeed, the /lib/udev/rules.d/60-persistent-storage.rules file does
exist in the initramfs.
I tried "udevadm control --reload-rules", but there was no output that I
can use. I also think I tried it with --debug, and I saw some info, but
nothing helpful.
I decid
Okay, this is helpful. Unfortunately, I don't know a lot about Debian's
initramfs scripts, and I'm fairly ignorant of udev beyond it's basic
functions and rule files. So, advice on basic troubleshooting of udev
would be helpful to me.
I am going to go play with this system here shortly, so
Nope. No changes since the original system creation. Thanks for trying
though.
On 10/12/13 7:18 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
Jesse Molina wrote:
As I said before, the md RAIDs are being assembled. udev, or
something else, is failing to properly create the device nodes.
A shot in the dark but..
Jesse Molina wrote:
> As I said before, the md RAIDs are being assembled. udev, or
> something else, is failing to properly create the device nodes.
A shot in the dark but... Have you added a new md device recently but
forgotten to update the /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf file? The initrd
creation will
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Jesse Molina wrote:
> On 10/12/13 8:22 AM, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
>> Jesse Molina wrote:
>>>
>>> I have a Debian unstable host which successfully boots from the
>>> linux-image-3.10-1-amd64 kernel package. However, I recently installed the
>>> linux-image-3.10-3-am
That's a good idea, but this system already had a rootdelay=5
configured, and I even raised it to 15 during testing with no effect
upon the situation.
I have had problems on a different host using md RAID5 as it's boot
array, which requires a rootdelay on the 3.8 and 3.10 kernels. There are
Jesse Molina wrote:
Hi
I have a Debian unstable host which successfully boots from the
linux-image-3.10-1-amd64 kernel package. However, I recently installed
the linux-image-3.10-3-amd64 kernel package, and it is unbootable.
When I boot from the linux-image-3.10-3-amd64 package kernel, the
Hi
I have a Debian unstable host which successfully boots from the
linux-image-3.10-1-amd64 kernel package. However, I recently installed
the linux-image-3.10-3-amd64 kernel package, and it is unbootable.
When I boot from the linux-image-3.10-3-amd64 package kernel, the boot
fails and drop
21 matches
Mail list logo
