Re: mdadm 0.8 suggestions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wednesday April 3, brian@worldcontrol.com wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 12:10:22PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> > I would really like to make a 1.0 release soon.  You can help by:
> >  - read the documentation (both --help and *.man) and comment on what
> >    is missing and what can be clarified.
> >  - test the code.  Try all your favourite usage patterns, and try some
> >    obscure things to and see if it does the right thing.
> >  - read the code and look for bits that don't seem to make sense.  If
> >    they don't seem to make sense, then they are probably wrong.
> 
> You might add a README or INSTALL file which says
> 
> ==========================================
> to build the tools issue the command
> 
>     make
> 
> to install the tools issue the command
> 
>     make install
> 
> ==========================================

Thanks.  I've done something like that.

> 
> I know this seems rather obvious but many people will look for
> README or INSTALL to tell them what to do.
> 
> 
> In the FAQ you might add:
> 
> ==========================================
> Q. Why won't the code compile with compiler optimization turned on (-O2)
>    under gcc 2.96 (redhat special), gcc 2.95.3, or gcc 3.04?
> 
> A. Remove '-Werror' from CFLAGS in the Makefile.  The usage of minsize
>    and maxsize in Create.c leads the compiler to stop due to a 
>    perceived error.
> 
> A. Alternately, re-write the code to make the compilers happy, and
>    post it to the linux-raid list.
> 
> ==========================================

I'd rather just fix it.  Is it that gcc thinks they might not be
initialised, as they are only set inside conditionals?  If  you just
initialise both to 0, does that fix it?


> 
> 
> In Manage.c line 132 'int i' is declared.  On line 155 it is referenced.
> Where is it set?

It isn't.  I missed this bit when converting from an array to a linked
list.  Fixed now.

> 
> In Create.c line 58 declares 'int i' and it is referenced on lines 131 &
> 132 without an intervening assignment.  At least so far as I can tell.

Similar problem.  Fixed now.

Thanks a lot.

NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux