> Deliver steps to reproduce, installation logs, machine information,
> version details, ANYTHING technical.
Version: OpenBSD 7.2 release
Arch: i386
Image: install72.iso
Machine: Thinkpad 380XD 32MB 233MHz Pentium MMX
Steps:
- Boot install CDROM
- (S)hell
- cd /dev
- sh MAKEDEV wd0
- fdisk -iy wd0
- disklabel -E wd0
- a\n\n\nRAID\nwq\n
- sh MAKEDEV wd1
- fdisk -iy wd1
- disklabel -E wd1
- a\n\n\nRAID\nwq\n
- bioctl -c C -l wd0a -k wd1a softraid0
- exit
- (I)nstall
- Installation stops on md_installboot()
- "/dev/rwd1c" does not exist
Steps for successful install:
- Boot install CDROM
- (S)hell
- ed install.sub
- /bioctl
- s/\$/"$
- s/$/"
- wq
- cd /dev
- sh MAKEDEV wd0
- fdisk -iy wd0
- disklabel -E wd0
- a\n\n\nRAID\nwq\n
- sh MAKEDEV wd1
- fdisk -iy wd1
- disklabel -E wd1
- a\n\n\nRAID\nwq\n
- bioctl -c C -l wd0a -k wd1a softraid0
- exit
- (I)nstall
- Installation successful, reboot
This e-mail could have ended here, but I have to point out several
issues that bothered me in your reply.
> I'm not saying the code is perfect, but so far you have failed to
> provide anything but long sentences about comments, shell behaviour
> and what MIGHT have been a user error... or whatever.
With all due respect I:
- described the issue:
- "My softraid keydisk did not get initialized during the
install process."
- explained in which function the error happened:
- "once it reached the installboot function, it would say
that /dev/rwd1c did not exist."
- This is where 99.99% of reports stop.
- precisely pointed at where the error came from
- "make_dev would not initialize my second disk on my softraid
volume"
- showed why the error exists:
- "without the double quotes, we get a multi-line result from
the $(bioctl|sed) command and only the first line is actually
passed to the make_dev function"
- and gave a solution:
- "When we place it inside the double quotes, the multi-line
result becomes a single line, and thus make_dev works as
expected."
Per the FAQ (https://www.openbsd.org/mail.html), include important
information.
And I did. I included ALL important information, even more than
necessary.
Did I deliver more information, when I was queried for more, just so
you could dismiss it as "long sentences about comments, shell
behaviour and what MIGHT have been a user error"? Fuck no. Read
through them, they are MEANINGFUL. They ARE the information you
requested.
I'm not a monkey who throws big sentences out there for no reason. My
sentences have meaning, just read through them. I'm not an idiot.
I'm very much the opposite, hence I prefer things to be simple, short
and to the point.
I'm here to fix a small, almost insignificant issue, not to discuss
about what should have/has been said. There is no point in discussing,
because the all the information is clearly there.
You know what? Fine, I don't care about it. Keep it that way and lets
move on, I'm not gonna be bothered by this anymore. This line has been
there since 2013, it should have bothered much more people at this
rate. Clearly a non-issue at this point.
I just hope next time I'm on this mailing list, I won't be received
with such indelicacy, as I'll provide actual lines of code, and not
just a DOUBLE-QUOTE fix for a obscure error that might even be user
error.
> I am very much aware of how the shell works, but still fail to see
> when/where/how this is a problem, because you are not being helpful.
I agree that you are aware of how the shell works, but you have clearly
not taken your time to read what I posted.
Yes. They were long, cohesive, and coherent sentences, but you just
decided to look at their sizes, not their contents. Of course they
won't be helpful that way.
You asked for more, and when you got it you dismissed it.
Your treatment was not even about 'not being enough', but rather
'it contains nothing useful', which is honestly absurd.
If you felt like my reply didn't provide you with enough info, just
ask for more. Don't discard what I wrote.
You are not being helpful.
> I have used plain disks, single-chunk and multi-chunk softraid
> volumes, sofraid volumes with passphrase and with keydisks. They all
> worked fine. I know people use all these different scenarios.
I never doubted about your experience with softraid volumes, and I'm
convinced it is extensive. But this is too far from being in-topic.
> Again, you even failed to tell us which OpenBSD version you've been
> using, on which architecture.
Pointless.
Don't bother about replying. I don't want to continue this.
