On Friday April 11, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
also sprach Wakko Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.04.11.1802 +0200]:
That wasn't the point. The point was I wasn't able to examine
the file. There's absolutely no reason that one has to attach it
to a loopback device just to examine the md
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Wakko Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.04.11.2318 +0200]:
Querying is the only thing I was after. The patch I made makes querying
work.
Wakko, is this querying-specific, and does the patch have no other
effects?
I don't think it's query specific due to
also sprach Wakko Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.04.11.1802 +0200]:
That wasn't the point. The point was I wasn't able to examine
the file. There's absolutely no reason that one has to attach it
to a loopback device just to examine the md superblock.
md is multi-device. A file is not a
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Wakko Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.04.11.1802 +0200]:
That wasn't the point. The point was I wasn't able to examine
the file. There's absolutely no reason that one has to attach it
to a loopback device just to examine the md superblock.
md is
also sprach Wakko Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.04.11.2318 +0200]:
Querying is the only thing I was after. The patch I made makes querying
work.
Wakko, is this querying-specific, and does the patch have no other
effects?
Neil, can we integrate this upstream? The patch makes mdadm -E/D
work
Package: mdadm
Version: 2.6.4-1
Severity: minor
Tags: patch
I made an image of 2 disks that are part of a 2 disk raid0. These images are
320gb in size. I tried to use mdadm -E to give me some information about
them which resulted in:
# mdadm -E /junk/nail.md0-part1of2.img
mdadm: cannot open
6 matches
Mail list logo
