To answer my own question so that others don't have to do so much testing and to ask for feedback if any experts think I'm storing up trouble! I have compiled a custom kernel which "works-for-me". On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, R.A.Owen wrote: > Should I still add the lvm-1.0.8 patch to linux-2.4.25 of is the code in > linux-2.4.25 more uptodate than the lvm-1.0.8 patch ? I took the _debian_ kernel source for linux-2.4.25 and patched it with lvm-1.0.8 (again from debian source package). (applied with offsets) > Also is there an official VFS-lock patch for linux-2.4.25 or do I just > have to force the VFS-lock-2.4.20 (from lvm-1.0.8) to fit? lvm-1.0.8 only has VFS-lock patches for kernels upto linux-2.4.20. device-mapper (ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/dm/device-mapper.1.00.08.tgz) also has VFS-lock patches which seem to be based on the lvm ones but for later kernels, eg: linux-2.4.22-VFS-lock.patch . This device mapper linux-2.4.22-VFS-lock.patch includes a HUNK for patching $LINUX/drivers/md/dm-snapshot.c but that file does not exist in a stock linux-2.4.25 kernel. So I touched the file so that the patch would apply. (I'm not using device mapper so I don't care about dm-snapshot.c ) I did: cd $LINUX [ -f drivers/md/dm-snapshot.c ] || touch drivers/md/dm-snapshot.c patch -p1 </path/to/devicemapper/patches/linux-2.4.22-VFS-lock.patch I then built the kernel and snapshots seem to work. I rebuilt the VFS-lock.patch without the dm-snapshot.c HUNK, and could post it, but it is against debain kernel sources not the linus tree so I won't bother unless anyone asks! Alex Owen _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
