On Mon, 2020-05-25 at 15:43 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: > > That decision was taken by mdadm without input from me, i.e. it's the > > default. I see there is an "--assume-clean" option which would possibly > > have skipped that step, though the man page doesn't recommend it unless > > you know what you're doing, which I clearly don't. All the same, saying > > "the partition table *will* be lost or meaningless after creating > > array" is certainly wrong. > > > It's not wrong. You were in a very special case where you are > > recreating the same raid from two drives that were in exactly the same > > configuration. In any other case, the partition table would be > > overwritten or would be invalid. You probably could have even used the > > "--assume-clean" option to avoid the resync. Certainly it's a special case, but the message is still wrong to state that something will happen when it won't. As I said, mdadm has detected the existence of an array, and knows (or can easily discover) what its parameters are, and therefore know that the new creation will not change them. poc _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
