[linux-lvm] 2.2.17 Kernel patch + 0.8 user tools

[linux-lvm] 2.2.17 Kernel patch + 0.8 user tools

[dirk.derycke]

Hi all,

where can I find a 2.2.17 kernel patch (more specific a stock kernel) for
LVM to use with the 0.8 user tools (I use the latest version from Andread
Dilger) ???
Andreas Dilger has a patch for Turbo Linux 2.2.16 but it doesn't apply
nicely to a 2.2.17 stock kernel (lots of rejects)

How long will it take before 0.9 arrives?

sincere regards,

Dirk

Re: [linux-lvm] 2.2.17 Kernel patch + 0.8 user tools

[Heinz J. Mauelshagen]

On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 11:18:22AM +0100, dirk.derycke@icos.be wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> where can I find a 2.2.17 kernel patch (more specific a stock kernel) for
> LVM to use with the 0.8 user tools (I use the latest version from Andread
> Dilger) ???
> Andreas Dilger has a patch for Turbo Linux 2.2.16 but it doesn't apply
> nicely to a 2.2.17 stock kernel (lots of rejects)

0.9 will include a 2.2.17 patch.

> 
> How long will it take before 0.9 arrives?

I am planing for next monday :-)

> 
> sincere regards,
> 
> Dirk
> 

-- 

Regards,
Heinz      -- The LVM guy --

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

Heinz Mauelshagen                                 Sistina Software Inc.
Senior Consultant/Developer                       Bartningstr. 12
                                                  64289 Darmstadt
                                                  Germany
Mauelshagen@Sistina.com                           +49 6151 7103 86
                                                       FAX 7103 96
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [linux-lvm] 2.2.17 Kernel patch + 0.8 user tools

[Chewie]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2256 bytes --]

On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 11:18:22AM +0100, dirk.derycke@icos.be wrote:
> where can I find a 2.2.17 kernel patch (more specific a stock
> kernel) for LVM to use with the 0.8 user tools (I use the latest
> version from Andread Dilger) ???

Did you read the README file at his FTP site?  If you had, you would
know that you have at least two patches you need to apply.  You're
lucky that I'm writing up the LVM Cheat Sheet as we speak. ;-)  I had
to research this stuff.  OK, it's not that difficult to find this
info, but it's not available on the LVM site for all to read.  This is
what you must do:

    Download the following files and patch the stock 2.2.17 kernel in
    the order that you see them.

    1.  Ingo Molnar's RAID Patch
        http://people.redhat.com/mingo/raid-patches/raid-2.2.17-A0

    2.  Stephen Tweedie's RAWIO Patch
        ftp://ftp.uk.linux.org/pub/linux/sct/fs/raw-io/raw-2.2.17.diff

    3.  Andreas Dilger's LVM Patch
        ftp://ftp.stelias.com/pub/adilger/lvm-0.8final-2.2.16TL.patch

I don't believe there's anything distribution specific to Andrea's
LVM kernel patch.  Download and compile the LVM tools from Andrea's
SRPM or tarball.  Tom Lees also has a Debian package of the slightly
older 0.8final tools.  You may want to download the source tarball
from Andreas, then apply the Debian patch to build the *.deb.  Note:
Tom's diff has all of the changes to use ext2resize (GPL) with the
e2fsadm tool instead of the resize2fs (commercial) tool.  Otherwise,
you have to edit these by hand.

> Andreas Dilger has a patch for Turbo Linux 2.2.16 but it doesn't apply
> nicely to a 2.2.17 stock kernel (lots of rejects)

Actually, I didn't get any rejects.  Since the patches are context
based, they do apply cleanly, if you do them in this order.  You will
see some messages about offsets, but that's it.

I'm compiling my test kernel as we speak, and I've got a full 9.1 GB
HD to play with. ;-)  In three hours, I'll have to make like I know
what I'm talking about, so I figured that I should successfully play
with the tools I'm supposed to be talking about (yeah, right).

-- 
Chad "^chewie, gunnarr" Walstrom <chewie@wookimus.net>
             http://www.wookimus.net/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

[linux-lvm] 0.9 next week?! Cool!

[Chewie]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 997 bytes --]

On Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 01:13:48PM +0000, Heinz J. Mauelshagen wrote:
> > How long will it take before 0.9 arrives?
> I am planing for next monday :-)

Woohoo!  Thankyou, Heinz, for your hard work!  

I have a request for you.  *PLEASE* don't use odd version names like
0.9final, or Linus' faux paux with the "-test10-pre8" horror. ;-)
Have you considered using a kernel-like versioning rule, where the
minor (second) number is odd for development branch and even for the
stable branch.  Yes, 0.7.131 may seem quite boring, but when 0.8 rolls
around, we'll know it's the first of the stable versions.  Any 0.8.x
versions would obviously be patch fixes to the stable version.  

Regardless, have you been holding out with 0.9 for so long because
you'd like it to be "stable" from its release point?  With that in
mind, would you consider releasing 0.9 as 0.10?

Again, thanks!

-- 
Chad "^chewie, gunnarr" Walstrom <chewie@wookimus.net>
             http://www.wookimus.net/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [linux-lvm] 0.9 next week?! Cool!

[Heinz J. Mauelshagen]

On Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 12:11:51PM -0600, Chewie wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 01:13:48PM +0000, Heinz J. Mauelshagen wrote:
> > > How long will it take before 0.9 arrives?
> > I am planing for next monday :-)
> 
> Woohoo!  Thankyou, Heinz, for your hard work!  

;-)

> 
> I have a request for you.  *PLEASE* don't use odd version names like
> 0.9final, or Linus' faux paux with the "-test10-pre8" horror. ;-)
> Have you considered using a kernel-like versioning rule, where the
> minor (second) number is odd for development branch and even for the
> stable branch.  Yes, 0.7.131 may seem quite boring, but when 0.8 rolls
> around, we'll know it's the first of the stable versions.  Any 0.8.x
> versions would obviously be patch fixes to the stable version.  

O.k.

Because there is already a lot of references out there to 0.9
0.9 I stay with it for now and will use 0.9.x for fixes.

Starting with 1.0 next year I'll switch to 1.0.x for stable and 1.1.x
for development.

> 
> Regardless, have you been holding out with 0.9 for so long because
> you'd like it to be "stable" from its release point?

That's part of the truth.
There where some private reasons too.

> With that in
> mind, would you consider releasing 0.9 as 0.10?

See above.

> 
> Again, thanks!

You're welcome!

> 
> -- 
> Chad "^chewie, gunnarr" Walstrom <chewie@wookimus.net>
>              http://www.wookimus.net/

-- 

Regards,
Heinz      -- The LVM guy --

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

Heinz Mauelshagen                                 Sistina Software Inc.
Senior Consultant/Developer                       Bartningstr. 12
                                                  64289 Darmstadt
                                                  Germany
Mauelshagen@Sistina.com                           +49 6151 7103 86
                                                       FAX 7103 96
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-