Re: RAID SB 1.x autodetection

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

 



On 30 May 2007, Bill Davidsen stated:

> Nix wrote:
>> On 29 May 2007, Jan Engelhardt uttered the following:
>>
>>
>>> from your post at http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg07384.html I read that autodetecting arrays with a
>>> 1.x superblock is currently impossible. Does it at least work to force the kernel to always assume a 1.x sb? There are some
>>> 'broken' distros out there that still don't use mdadm in initramfs, and recreating the initramfs each time is a bit cumbersome...
>>
>> The kernel build system should be able to do that for you, shouldn't it?
>>
> That would be an improvement, yes.

Allow me to rephrase: the kernel build system *can* do that for you ;)
that is, it can build a gzipped cpio archive from components located
anywhere on the filesystem or arbitrary source located under usr/.

-- 
`On a scale of one to ten of usefulness, BBC BASIC was several points ahead
 of the competition, scoring a relatively respectable zero.' --- Peter Corlett
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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