> So I guess I will have to edit all the scripts to put an extra 'p' in them > as well. (Really kind of a pain, but if this new scheme is going to be the > standard, I can do it, ...but if this is just a 'proposed' change, then I > would rather not. > > So is this Official? If so I don't mind changing them around and I know > SuSE will eventually catch up. I've cc'ed Heinz Mauelshagen (the dev at > Redhat to see if he thinks this is permanent. This does present a problem > for Linux dual boot boxes. What was the reason to the change anyway? > > Tobias, let me know if you want me to run any more test. (I don't have > anything to rebuild right now or I would try the -R command which is an > EXCELLENT addition to dmraid. Kuddos to the brainchild behind that. Hi, since i didn't have changed the source code of dmraid i think it is an official change, i guess it follows the kernel name scheme here. I try to add some more dmraid specific stuff to archboot setup routine. Reading through this wiki: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Installing_with_Fake-RAID - Is it really enough to call dmraid -ay after you partitioned your raidset? Isn't this updated automatically? - There are some mentions that you need to dmsetup remove_all before, which I think is not correct. - Installing grub do i need this C H S hack? Is grub failing if i just install it on (hd0)? - How about lilo? Is lilo working without any modification? Sorry for asking so many questions, but without the hardware some things are really difficult to guess. Thanks for your help on this. greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
