Por favor, lenguaje en Español

> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 17:24:36 +0000
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Bug 569900] Re: partman sometimes creates partitions such that 
> there        is ambiguity between whether the superblock is on the disk      
> device or the partition device
> 
> There are other way to get this bug too and it will haunt us back in the
> future and not only within Ubuntu
> 
> It hit me when partitionising with fdisk -u /dev/sdx but not with fdisk
> /dev/sdx because the first fits tightly to the end of the drive, the
> second leaves some space. The same happened when using GPT through
> cfdisk (not sure, its been a while).
> 
> All in all it shouldn't be wrong to use a tightly fitting partition
> table. The real problem here is that a 0.9 superblock can not be
> reliably source to either a device or a partition (or a LVM, actually I
> can imagine scenarios where its not only about drive or partition but in
> addition about other mappings like LVM, crypt, hey, even a stupidily
> placed part of a filesystem could qualify as a superblock). Until now it
> worked because scanning for superblock accidentially used a less error
> prone sequence for scanning (in fact even then the scanning usually ran
> head first into a wall but accidentially this didn't get through to the
> user)
> 
> In short: Placing vital information at the end of a bunch of sectors and
> hoping for a successful poking-around by the startup is stupid and prone
> for error.
> 
> Everyone should use front-aligned superblocks, that is version 1.1
> and/or 1.2 because every known mapping (LVM, MD, Crypt, filesystems) are
> able to preserve lead-in-gaps and deliver this vital information to the
> next layer. Not so for for lead-out-gaps.
> 
> -- 
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to Ubuntu
> ubuntu-10.04.2.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/569900
> 
> Title:
>   partman sometimes creates partitions such that there is ambiguity
>   between whether the superblock is on the disk device or the partition
>   device
> 
> Status in “grub2” package in Ubuntu:
>   Invalid
> Status in “partman-base” package in Ubuntu:
>   Fix Released
> Status in “grub2” source package in Lucid:
>   Invalid
> Status in “partman-base” source package in Lucid:
>   Fix Released
> Status in “grub2” source package in Maverick:
>   Invalid
> Status in “partman-base” source package in Maverick:
>   Fix Released
> 
> Bug description:
>   Binary package hint: mdadm
> 
>   In a KVM, I can do this just fine:
> 
>    * Using 2 virtual disk images
>    * Install Lucid Server amd64
>    * Both disks partitioned to just one large Linux raid partition
>    * RAID1 these two together, /dev/md0
>    * Put / on an ext4 filesystem on /dev/md0
>    * Install
> 
>   The above works.
> 
>   However, I have spent my entire weekend trying to get 10.04 on a RAID1
>   of two 500GB SATA disks, without success.
> 
>   I partitioned them the same as above.  And conducted the install.
> 
>   When I boot into the new system, I get dropped to an initramfs shell.
> 
>   I can see that /dev/md0 exists, and is in the process of resyncing.
> 
>   I try to "mount /dev/md0 /root" and I get:
>   mount: mounting /dev/md0 on /root/ failed: Invalid argument
> 
>   Also, see something else that's odd...  My /dev/md0 looks "correct",
>   in that it's composed of /dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1.  However, I also see
>   a /dev/md0p1, which is composed of /dev/sda and /dev/sdb (the whole
>   disks?).  Furthermore, if I go into /dev/disk/by-uuid, there is only
>   one symlink there, pointing to /dev/md0p1.  And this UUID is what is
>   in fact in grub as the root device.  That looks quite wrong.
> 
>   This looks pretty release-critical, to me, as it's affecting RAID
>   installs of the server.
> 
>   TEST CASE: The above problem should arise when attempting a RAID
>   install on any disk whose size is between 1048576*n+512 and
>   1048576*n+65535 bytes, for integer values of n.  In order to reproduce
>   this, the root filesystem should be created on a RAID array whose
>   member devices extend all the way to the end of the disk (i.e. accept
>   the default size for the partition in the installer).
> 
>   To validate this from -proposed (once available), please note that you
>   will need to use a netboot installation image and boot with apt-
>   setup/proposed=true on the kernel command line.
> 
>

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/569900

Title:
  partman sometimes creates partitions such that there is ambiguity
  between whether the superblock is on the disk device or the partition
  device

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to