On Tuesday 24 June 2008, Matt Harrison wrote:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
| On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:32:33 +0100, Matt Harrison wrote:
| Sorry for replying to my own message, just had a thought. Could
| this all be a udev rules problem? I mean could some new rules in
| the updated udev package be
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:41:12 +0100
Matt Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
Some of you may remember my problems with lvm after an update in
http://www.archivum.info/gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org/2008-04/msg00899.html
I'm now headed back towards the same situation. I have a load
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sorry for replying to my own message, just had a thought. Could this all
be a udev rules problem? I mean could some new rules in the updated udev
package be causing my lvm/raid devices to not be picked up and
activated?
I've been trying to break a
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:32:33 +0100, Matt Harrison wrote:
Sorry for replying to my own message, just had a thought. Could this all
be a udev rules problem? I mean could some new rules in the updated udev
package be causing my lvm/raid devices to not be picked up and
activated?
Are your LVM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Neil Bothwick wrote:
| On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:32:33 +0100, Matt Harrison wrote:
|
| Sorry for replying to my own message, just had a thought. Could this all
| be a udev rules problem? I mean could some new rules in the updated udev
| package be
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 07:33:11AM +0200, Dirk Heinrichs wrote:
Well, then upgrade to BL2! And upgrade all the other packages as well. You
only have to keep in mind to tell the initscripts that your RAID and LVM
devices need to be activated, too.
Isn't BL2 masked ~arch? I think it was when I
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:20:08 +0100, Matt Harrison wrote:
Isn't BL2 masked ~arch? I think it was when I originally ran into this
problem. Doesn't that mean that my system will upgrade stable packages
that MUST be run using a package that I have to unmask?
No. The BL2 init script provided with
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 03:24:29PM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:20:08 +0100, Matt Harrison wrote:
Isn't BL2 masked ~arch? I think it was when I originally ran into this
problem. Doesn't that mean that my system will upgrade stable packages
that MUST be run using a
Hi all,
Some of you may remember my problems with lvm after an update in
http://www.archivum.info/gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org/2008-04/msg00899.html
I'm now headed back towards the same situation. I have a load of updates to do
according to emerge -DNavu world but I've had to mask all upgraded
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:41:12 +0100
Matt Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
Some of you may remember my problems with lvm after an update in
http://www.archivum.info/gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org/2008-04/msg00899.html
I'm now headed back towards the same situation. I have a load
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:46:25PM +0200, Florian Philipp wrote:
Which versions are you using, to which shall they be updated and on
which arch are you? Knowing emerge --info and your profile might also
help.
Thanks for the reply.
Ok, versions in use:
lvm2-2.02.10
mdadm-2.6.4-r1
udev-104-r12
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 22:01:03 +0100
Matt Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:46:25PM +0200, Florian Philipp wrote:
Which versions are you using, to which shall they be updated and on
which arch are you? Knowing emerge --info and your profile might
also help.
On Wednesday 18 June 2008, Matt Harrison wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:46:25PM +0200, Florian Philipp wrote:
Which versions are you using, to which shall they be updated and on
which arch are you? Knowing emerge --info and your profile might
also help.
Thanks for the reply.
Ok,
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 11:48:19PM +0200, Florian Philipp wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 22:01:03 +0100
Matt Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:46:25PM +0200, Florian Philipp wrote:
Which versions are you using, to which shall they be updated and on
which arch are
14 matches
Mail list logo
