On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 07:17:57AM +0100, Zavodsky, Daniel (GE Money) wrote:
> Hello,
>       I can confirm this, I cannot just give devices to mdadm but I have to 
> provide the uuid. 
>       I did not report it as a bug because I thought it was a "feature" :-)
> 

Thanks for confirming this! :)

I haven't had time (yet) to file a bug, or dig more into it to see if
there's some real reason why --uuid is required..

-- Pasi

> Regards,
>       Daniel
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
> On Behalf Of John Summerfield
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 4:17 AM
> To: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 (Tikanga) discussion mailing-list
> Subject: Re: [rhelv5-list] RHEL 5.3 bug or feature? in "linux rescue" 
> modemdadm only can assemble/start raid1 array with uuid,not with device names
> 
> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > Hello.
> > 
> > Any ideas.. is this a bug or a feature? 
> > 
> > I have a machine with rhel 5.3 installed. It's using mdadm software 
> > raid1, so it has md0 (sda1+sdb1) and md1 (sdb2+sdb2).
> 
> Are those the correct devices for md1?
> > 
> > If I boot to "linux rescue" mode from rhel CD/DVD and try to manually 
> > start the arrays I notice this:
> > 
> > # mdadm --assemble -a yes /dev/md0 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1
> > mdadm: no devices found for /dev/md0
> > 
> > # mdadm --assemble -a yes /dev/md1 /dev/sda2 /dev/sdb2
> > mdadm: no devices found for /dev/md1
> > 
> > BUT, if I do this:
> > 
> > # mdadm --assemble --uuid <uuid_of_mdX> /dev/mdX
> > 
> > it works as expected.. and yes, it uses the correct and very same sda? and 
> > sdb? devices.
> 
> I wonder....
> 
> I suggest you check again that you are doing everything correctly, and that 
> you have the correct device names in your email.
> 
> > 
> > Also "mdadm --examine /dev/sda?" gives correct/matching uuids.
> > 
> > Would be a lot easier to NOT type the uuid, in some recovery cases :)
> 
> I agree with this. Once you have satisfied yourself again that you have done 
> it correctly. Then, I recommend reporting it as a bug. Whether it's a coding 
> error or a design error, the behaviour you report is unreasonable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Cheers
> John
> 
> -- spambait
> [email protected]  [email protected]
> -- Advice
> http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
> 
> You cannot reply off-list:-)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rhelv5-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rhelv5-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list

_______________________________________________
rhelv5-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list

Reply via email to