Re: behavior different from mdadm 2.6.4 and 3.0?

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

 



On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 7:27 PM, Neil Brown
> That's the problem then.
> The array was started from initrd and any mdadm/map that was created
> would have got lost.
> Now it needs one to continue with assembly and cannot find one.
> I'll have to get it to do the "-Ir" thing automagically if mdadm/map
> does not exist.

>> Does that help?
>
> So: yes it does - thanks.

Awesome!

> I've got some coding to do ;-)

I'm sorry to be causing you more work.

-- 
Jon
--
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