On Sat, 18 Sep 1999, James Manning wrote:
> [ Saturday, September 18, 1999 ] James Manning wrote:
> > Ok, I wrote a patch that passes the ctl_table pointer of
> > /proc/dev/md as the param for raid?_init, but noticed differing
> > opinions on return values (although it doesn't much matter)
>
> [
This is a Pliant (http://pliant.cams.ehess.fr/) script that should enable
you to make changes in a RAID configuration with (or with the hope of)
no data loss.
Lets take an example:
The old /etc/raidtab configuration file is:
raiddev /dev/md0
raid-level5
nr-raid-disks
Thanks for the advice people.
I now have a 64MB boot/emergency partition that ive actually put a mini
debian distribution on, so i can copy my linux boot files into there and
update lilo from there.
I was trying to set boot=/dev/md0 which i realise now doesnt work (thanks
for pointing that one o
[ Saturday, September 18, 1999 ] James Manning wrote:
> Ok, I wrote a patch that passes the ctl_table pointer of
> /proc/dev/md as the param for raid?_init, but noticed differing
> opinions on return values (although it doesn't much matter)
[snip]
Well, I tried booting and it died with some SYSC
Ok, I wrote a patch that passes the ctl_table pointer of
/proc/dev/md as the param for raid?_init, but noticed differing
opinions on return values (although it doesn't much matter)
[root@jmm block]# grep raid._init *.c|grep -v return
md.c:void raid0_init (void);
md.c:void raid1_init (void);
md.c:
[ Saturday, September 18, 1999 ] Ingo Molnar wrote:
> James, are you patching against the latest RAID source? 2.3.18 has a
> painfully outdated RAID driver. (i'm working on porting the newest stuff
> to 2.3 right now)
I guess so... I needed 2.3.1[78] for a third-party binary-only module,
but coul
At 06:17 PM 9/18/99 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>2.2.12 (and the pre-2.2.13 patches) are better than the 2.2.11 kernel. If
>you apply the 2.2.11 patch to 2.2.12 then you'll get a single reject,
>which you can safely ignore. (it tries to add something that has already
>been merged into the main tre
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, James Manning wrote:
> Since the previous sysctl code had been ripped out, this was pretty
James, are you patching against the latest RAID source? 2.3.18 has a
painfully outdated RAID driver. (i'm working on porting the newest stuff
to 2.3 right now)
> simple, just pulling
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, David A. Cooley wrote:
> Running Kernel 2.2.11 with the raid patch and all is well...
> I'm wanting to upgrade to the 2.2.12 kernel just because it's newer...
> The 2.2.11 raid patch had some problems on the 2.2.12 source. Is there any
> benefit of the 2.2.12 kernel over t
> If i try and put root=/dev/md1 in lilo.conf then i get the error device
> 0x0900 not known.
There's my lilo.conf line:
root=0x900
It works. 0x901 should work too, I think. :-)
Egon
> my question is, how do i create a raid device (/dev/md3 for example) and
> then put a filesystem on it without losing the current data?
You're nearly there. I don't quite understand something, though. You start with
/home on sda6 and /web on sda7. /dev/md3 contains sda7, so logically you would
11 matches
Mail list logo
