Sorry, long posponed email here: I'm sending it because the last
retorical questions are still relevent.
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009, Neil Brown wrote:
metadata=0.9 would never work. It is a version number, not a decimal
number. metadata=0.90 is correct and totally different from
metadata=0.9
That's what I figured.
Do you have any idea what "upgrade script" put "metadata=0.9" in
there?
I don't know, My best guess it that it's come from the initramdisk
creation as that's the only thing that cared, but that uses mdadm (mkconf)
to create the file. Thinking it through, I suspect it's possible that it's
a leftover from long ago and only recently has the initrd begun to care.
It would have still been created from a script or an "mdadm >> conf" though.
I note that mdadm does different lines depending on how you call it ...
# mdadm --detail --scan --config=partitions
ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid1 num-devices=7 metadata=00.90
UUID=6daad342:4f295c4f:a3bab061:9112c3c7
ARRAY /dev/md1 level=raid10 num-devices=6 metadata=01.02 name=RIPLinuX:1
UUID=fa6457c6:33314a03:36f96c6c:5a867416
ARRAY /dev/md2 level=raid10 num-devices=6 metadata=01.02 name=RIPLinuX:2
UUID=a2070504:b2adff98:de745c49:e2623eb7
# mdadm --examine --scan --config=partitions
ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid1 num-devices=7
UUID=6daad342:4f295c4f:a3bab061:9112c3c7
ARRAY /dev/md/1 level=raid10 metadata=1.2 num-devices=6
UUID=fa6457c6:33314a03:36f96c6c:5a867416 name=RIPLinuX:1
ARRAY /dev/md/2 level=raid10 metadata=1.2 num-devices=6
UUID=a2070504:b2adff98:de745c49:e2623eb7 name=RIPLinuX:2
Which form of the metadata would be 'right'?
Why does --examine _sometimes_ omit it?
--
Rob. (Robert de Bath <robert$ @ debath.co.uk>)
<http://www.debath.co.uk/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
