[linux-lvm] Problems with 2.4.10 > lvm 1.0

[linux-lvm] Problems with 2.4.10 > lvm 1.0

[Conny Brunnkvist / dimac.net]

Hello. I just rebooted to my new 2.4.10 kernel, and my VG was not to be
found. So, I thought I'd better update my userland tools from beta 7 (I
think it was) to 1.0.

Making and installing them worked fine. So did the kernel-patch and its
compilation, but i get the following when trying to install or newly
compiled 1.0 module:

depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.10/kernel/drivers/md/lvm-mod.o
depmod:	get_hardblocksize

I've read somewhere else in the list-archive that changing the
get_hardblocksize lines to get_hardsect_size could help, but I have
absolutely no clue on what difference that'd make: is it all about a
function that have had its name changed, or is there something else to it? 

I _don't_ want to try it if it means risking corruption of my data..

Any ideas would be appreciated.

//conny

Re: [linux-lvm] Problems with 2.4.10 > lvm 1.0

[Goetz Bock]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 719 bytes --]


On Fri, Sep 28 '01 at 16:46, Conny Brunnkvist / dimac.net wrote:
> Making and installing them worked fine. So did the kernel-patch and its
> compilation, but i get the following when trying to install or newly
> compiled 1.0 module:
Are you sure you patched the same kernel you're running?

> depmod:	get_hardblocksize
> 
> I've read somewhere else in the list-archive that changing the
> get_hardblocksize lines to get_hardsect_size could help, but I have
There is a 1.0.1rc2 that has fixed this bug, but has a new one with the
min/max macros. For 2.4.10 you have to change the min/max macros to
min_t/max_t.
-- 
Goetz Bock                                              IT Consultant
Dipl.-Inf. Univ.

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

Re: [linux-lvm] Problems with 2.4.10 > lvm 1.0

[AJ Lewis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1707 bytes --]

On Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 05:23:20PM +0200, Goetz Bock wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Sep 28 '01 at 16:46, Conny Brunnkvist / dimac.net wrote:
> > Making and installing them worked fine. So did the kernel-patch and its
> > compilation, but i get the following when trying to install or newly
> > compiled 1.0 module:
> Are you sure you patched the same kernel you're running?

Yeah, there was a bug in the patch generation scripts that was fixed in
1.0.1-rc1 i believe.  So what is happening is the patch generation thinks
you have kernel 2.4.1

> > depmod:	get_hardblocksize
> > 
> > I've read somewhere else in the list-archive that changing the
> > get_hardblocksize lines to get_hardsect_size could help, but I have
> There is a 1.0.1rc2 that has fixed this bug, but has a new one with the
> min/max macros. For 2.4.10 you have to change the min/max macros to
> min_t/max_t.

There will be a 1.0.1-rc3 coming out (hopefully) today that addresses the
kernel changes in 2.4.10.

Regards,
-- 
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc.                  Voice:  612-638-0500
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111              Fax:    612-638-0500
Minneapolis, MN 55414                  E-Mail: lewis@sistina.com
http://www.sistina.com

Current GPG fingerprint = 60F3 160D C0D5 2C4B 751B  4FF9 6F67 E9BC 44CD DE95

-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
Sometimes I have a difficult time handling myself in social situations.
I just start scampering around neurotically, frantically jumping all
over guests. I think it all goes back to when I was raised in the wild
by miniature schnauzers.
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------

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