On Thu, Feb 23, 2012, at 09:34 AM, Jes Sorensen wrote: > On 02/23/12 02:57, John Robinson wrote: > > On 22/02/2012 23:16, Jes Sorensen wrote: > > [...] > >> The goal was to try and reduce the number of bug reports over this by > >> making it more obvious/explicit, so if you have a suggestion for how to > >> do so in a better way, I am all game. > > > > How about: > > > > mdadm /dev/md0 --add %s > > : %s was already a member of /dev/md0, attempting re-add > > : Re-add failed because <reason> > > : Not performing add as that would zero the superblock on %s and make it > > a spare > > : mdadm --add used to do that automatically but it was potentially > > dangerous > > : If that is what you really want to do, use mdadm --zero-superblock %s > > first. > > > > This would get my vote, way better than my messy attempt. Would : If %s doesn't hold any useful data, use "mdadm --zero-superblock %s" before adding. be a further refinement? Ali. -- 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
