Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 08:57:54 -0400,
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Since there is a general use for more ability to create custom raid
arrays, the ability to use an existing array would be useful. I find it
particularly vexing that whoever wrote the raid code did not understand
the difference between raid-10 and raid-1+0 and insists that at least
four drives are needed to support raid-10, and the number must be even.
So put this in as an enhancement request to use existing arrays, see if
that goes anywhere.
The people who control this do not think raid 1 arrays with one element
should be supported for installs. I am not that interested in raid 10. If
there is an incorrect limitation on the number of elements for that type of an
array, someone who knows more about it should make that request.
The point is that since you have the problem which would be solved by
using existing raid arrays, and you have been trying without success to
get action as a bug for years, you might be the person to present this
as an enhancement request to use existing raid arrays, since that would
solve other people's problems as well as yours, and get you some support
from people who would also be helped. You don't have to know much about
raid-10 to say "use existing arrays," people who know tricks will take
it from there, including you.
Or you can go another four years trying to get someone to agree that
it's a bug, and explicit support for degraded arrays should be added.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
Obscure bug of 2004: BASH BUFFER OVERFLOW - if bash is being run by a
normal user and is setuid root, with the "vi" line edit mode selected,
and the character set is "big5," an off-by-one error occurs during
wildcard (glob) expansion.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
