On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 08:47:27 +0000 "J. Ali Harlow" <ali@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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? Maybe .. though "useful" seems a bit of a .... soft(?) word. What exactly does it mean in this context? I would probably prefer something like "If you are happy to discard the data on .....". And in the earlier suggestion with have "<reason>" which would certainly be good to have, but filling in the details is not straight forward unfortunately. I'm happy to take patches .... they don't have to be perfect, just an improvement on what we currently have is enough. NeilBrown
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
