On August 8, 2025 4:03 pm, Fiona Ebner wrote: > Quoting the commit message from [0] verbatim: > >> thin_check v1.0.x reveals data block ref count issue that is not being >> detected by previous versions, which blocks the pool from activation if >> there are any leaked blocks. To reduce potential user complaints on >> inactive pools after upgrading and also maintain backward compatibility >> between LVM and older thin_check, we decided to adopt the 'auto-repair' >> functionality in the --clear-needs-check-flag option, rather than >> passing --auto-repair from lvm.conf. > > Unfortunately, there was already a user report without the override > [1], so this might not be the only issue. It's still worth warning > users about this though. > > NOTE: For stable-8 the version check in d/postinst needs to be adapted > or maybe we want to run the check always there?
I don't think we need to run it there at all, do we? the problematic behaviour only comes with trixie's version of thin_check AFAIU? > [0]: > https://github.com/device-mapper-utils/thin-provisioning-tools/commit/eb28ab94 > [1]: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/169356/post-789894 > > > Fiona Ebner (2): > 8 to 9: lvm config: check that --clear-needs-check-flag is set if > there is a thin_check_options override > d/postinst: lvm config: check that --clear-needs-check-flag is set if > there is a thin_check_options override > > PVE/CLI/pve8to9.pm | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > debian/postinst | 8 ++++++++ > 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+) > > -- > 2.47.2 > > > > _______________________________________________ > pve-devel mailing list > pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel > > > _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
