Hello Ben and Christoph,
Ben Hutchings [2016-01-29 13:50 +]:
> # systemd maintainers do not want to handle ROOTDELAY
For the record, this isn't just a question of *where* to put a "sleep
$ROOTDELAY" -- my point is, the previous sleep was entirely
non-sensical, and moving it around would
On Sat, 2016-01-30 at 23:57 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello Ben and Christoph,
>
> Ben Hutchings [2016-01-29 13:50 +]:
> > # systemd maintainers do not want to handle ROOTDELAY
>
> For the record, this isn't just a question of *where* to put a "sleep
> $ROOTDELAY" -- my point is, the
Control: reassign -1 udev 220-4
On Sun, 2016-01-03 at 16:21 +0100, Christoph Egger wrote:
> Package: initramfs-tools
> Version: 0.120
> Severity: important
>
> Hi!
>
> the initramfs totally ignores the rootdelay / rootwait parameters and
> just instantly boots up.
[...]
It has never
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.120
Severity: important
Hi!
the initramfs totally ignores the rootdelay / rootwait parameters and
just instantly boots up. As a result I always get a degraded array
activated as the second disk is not yet available. The second disk
just shows up a few blinks
4 matches
Mail list logo
