[linux-lvm] LVM in the Linux kernel

[linux-lvm] LVM in the Linux kernel

[Ole Jakob Skjelten]

Just one small question:
The current 2.3.x kernels do, to the best of knowledge, not
contain LVM. And isn't it so that Linus has closed the kernel
for new additions/features until the release of 2.4.0? I seem to
have read somwhere that it is now too late to get anything
radically new into the kernel, at least until development start 
on 2.5.x kernels. Am I mistaken, or does this mean that it will
be some time before we see LVM in a stable kernel? (The fact that
for instance S.u.S.E. is shipping a kernel with LVM support helps,
but can hardly be said to be satisfactory...).


Best regards 
Ole Jakob - who'd *really* like to see LVM in a stable kernel soon :)

-- 
Ole Jakob Skjelten (olesk@pvv.org) www.pvv.org/~olesk
Systemspesialist, AIX
Bull AS, Fyrstikkalleen 3A, PB 6144 Etterstad, 0602 Oslo, Norway
Tlf (+47) 22575972(w) / 91820113(m).

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM in the Linux kernel

[Heinz Mauelshagen]

Hi Ole,

Linus gets the LVM kernel patches since several months,
he is aware of our petition (more than 1000 nice people on it 8*),
he got triggered by Dirk Hohndel of SuSE several times

_but_

he didn't give any statement at _all_ directly to me or on any list 8*(((

IMHO the inclusion of LVM in the SuSE distribution will help a lot...

Regards,
Heinz


> Just one small question:
> The current 2.3.x kernels do, to the best of knowledge, not
> contain LVM. And isn't it so that Linus has closed the kernel
> for new additions/features until the release of 2.4.0? I seem to
> have read somwhere that it is now too late to get anything
> radically new into the kernel, at least until development start 
> on 2.5.x kernels. Am I mistaken, or does this mean that it will
> be some time before we see LVM in a stable kernel? (The fact that
> for instance S.u.S.E. is shipping a kernel with LVM support helps,
> but can hardly be said to be satisfactory...).
> 


-- 

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Systemmanagement CS-TS                           T-Nova
                                                 Entwicklungszentrum Darmstadt
Heinz Mauelshagen                                Otto-Roehm-Strasse 71c
Senior Systems Engineer                          Postfach 10 05 41
                                                 64205 Darmstadt
mge@ez-darmstadt.telekom.de                      Germany
                                                 +49 6151 886-425
                                                          FAX-386
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM in the Linux kernel

[Michael Marxmeier]

Forwarded message from A James Lewis <james@vr1-workhorse1.vrtx.net>

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Where do I find an overview and/or examples of it's use?  how does it
co-exist with the RAID0145 patch?

I understand the reasons for not including anything new at this
stage...
RAID was very nearly included but I think we're going to wait for 2.4
now....

2.4 seems likley to be here in the next few months... so perhaps it's
best
to wait.

On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Heinz Mauelshagen wrote:

> 
> Hi Ole,
> 
> Linus gets the LVM kernel patches since several months,
> he is aware of our petition (more than 1000 nice people on it 8*),
> he got triggered by Dirk Hohndel of SuSE several times
> 
> _but_
> 
> he didn't give any statement at _all_ directly to me or on any list 8*(((
> 
> IMHO the inclusion of LVM in the SuSE distribution will help a lot...
> 
> Regards,
> Heinz
> 
> 
> > Just one small question:
> > The current 2.3.x kernels do, to the best of knowledge, not
> > contain LVM. And isn't it so that Linus has closed the kernel
> > for new additions/features until the release of 2.4.0? I seem to
> > have read somwhere that it is now too late to get anything
> > radically new into the kernel, at least until development start 
> > on 2.5.x kernels. Am I mistaken, or does this mean that it will
> > be some time before we see LVM in a stable kernel? (The fact that
> > for instance S.u.S.E. is shipping a kernel with LVM support helps,
> > but can hardly be said to be satisfactory...).
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 
> Systemmanagement CS-TS                           T-Nova
>                                                  Entwicklungszentrum Darmstadt
> Heinz Mauelshagen                                Otto-Roehm-Strasse 71c
> Senior Systems Engineer                          Postfach 10 05 41
>                                                  64205 Darmstadt
> mge@ez-darmstadt.telekom.de                      Germany
>                                                  +49 6151 886-425
>                                                           FAX-386
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM in the Linux kernel

[Fernando Dammous]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 841 bytes --]

Hi all,

Sometimes I am thinking and I fear for my conclusions:
Would not Linus Torvalds be the weakest link of that called Linux-Project?
How much of responsibility does he delegate to your closer and reliable
collaborators?
AFAIK, Alan Cox already included a patch of LVM in an of your ACs. What the
reaction of Linus? Alan's experience was not enough for him?
In relation to Linux, which the great innovations that will be present in
the kernel 24?
Which your attentions?  Plug 'n Play ?
Will it be that he doesn't think the inclusion of LVM (ASAP) is it so
important? What is important then?
To include in the stock kernel such an important subsystem for the  Linux's
community like LVM (and how many other?) is it being necessary every appeal
type.

I still have a lot of hope and trust. 
Cheers,
Fernando Dammous


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1213 bytes --]

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM in the Linux kernel

[Harald Milz]

Fernando Dammous <ferdam@internetcom.com.br> wrote:

> Sometimes I am thinking and I fear for my conclusions:
> Would not Linus Torvalds be the weakest link of that called Linux-Project?

It strikes me that he did include the broken 64G patch in 2.3.something
instead. But maybe Dirk can say something more about that. 

-- 
FAR OUT!