Geoff, I haven't seen that reported before. The characters displayed are next in the collating sequence, so that seems OK. I guess the main question is, when the system comes up, are the device nodes defined in /dev, and do they work? If so, then I wouldn't worry about it much.
Mark Post -----Original Message----- From: Geoff O'Callaghan [mailto:gocallag@;au1.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 10:21 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: quick check on potential 2.4.19 problem G'day, I'm just doing a quick check to see if anyone has seen this problem before doing some detailed research or if it's something that I've broken all by myself :-) We've just upgraded a SLES7 server to 2.4.19. Our zipl.conf has disk defined as : dasd=0101,0201-0208,020f,0301-0308,0401-0408,0501,0502,0503 The platform is z/VM 4.1 on a G5 box. The symptom we see are : dasd: Registered successfully to major no 94 dasd(eckd): ECKD discipline initializing dasd(eckd): /dev/ ( 94: 0),0101@0c: 3390/0A(CU:3990/04) Cyl:200 Head:15 Sec:224 dasd(eckd): /dev/ ( 94: 0),0101@0c: DIAG210 returned VRDCRCCL = 04, VRDCCRTY = 82, VRDCCRFT = 82 dasd(eckd): /dev/ ( 94: 0),0101@0c: XRC_supported reset because of missing VM support dasd(eckd): /dev/ ( 94: 0),0101@0c: 3390/0A(CU:3990/04): Configuration data read debug: : new level 3 dasd(eckd): /dev/ ( 94: 0),0101@0c: (4kB blks): 144000kB at 48kB/trk compatible disk layout dasd(eckd): /dev/ ( 94: 4),0201@0d: 3390/0A(CU:3990/04) Cyl:200 Head:15 Sec:224 dasd(eckd): /dev/ ( 94: 4),0201@0d: DIAG210 returned VRDCRCCL = 04, VRDCCRTY = 82, VRDCCRFT = 82 dasd(eckd): /dev/ ( 94: 4),0201@0d: XRC_supported reset because of missing VM support dasd(eckd): /dev/ ( 94: 4),0201@0d: 3390/0A(CU:3990/04): Configuration data read and Partition check: dasda:VOL1/ 0X0101: dasda1 dasdb:VOL1/ 0X0201: dasdb1 dasdc:VOL1/ 0X0202: dasdc1 . . . dasds:VOL1/ 0X0401: dasds1 dasd{:VOL1/ 0X0501: dasd{1 dasd|:VOL1/ 0X0502: dasd|1 dasd}:VOL1/ 0X0503: dasd}1 Note the '{' where it should be /dev/dasdaa1 etc etc. Anyone else seen this? Cheers Geoff
