From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulrich Wiederhold Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] lvm-1.0.1-rc4 and 2.4.13 Message-ID: <20011026213005.C928@sky.net> References: <20011026005405.A21775@sky.net> <20011026095641.C587@tykepenguin.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <20011026095641.C587@tykepenguin.com> Sender: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Errors-To: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Reply-To: linux-lvm@sistina.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri Oct 26 14:27:02 2001 List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: linux-lvm@sistina.com * Patrick Caulfield [011026 10:56]: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 12:54:05AM +0200, Ulrich Wiederhold wrote: > > Hello, > > I untared 2.4.13, applied the official xfs patch, then the fresh created > > lvm patch. > >=20 > > No mistakes. >=20 > The XFS patch removes some essential LVM bits from the Makefile I think (= maybe > it has an old LVM in there or something) >=20 > Edit drivers/md/Makefile and change the lvm-mod-objs line to read: >=20 > lvm-mod-objs :=3D lvm.o lvm-snap.o lvm-fs.o >=20 Hello, thanks again. I did: * untar the kernel 2.4.13 * patched with xfs * created lvm-patch * patched with lvm * changed the line as described above * configured the kernel * built the kernel This won=B4t work in another order, e.g. built the lvmpatch with a vanilla-kernel or apply the lvm patch first! I always got errors doing this. Two questions: 1. Why isn=B4t lvm-1.0.1-rc4 in the current Linux-Kernel? Why do I still need to patch? I think this version is already stable and better than the older one, isn=B4t it? 2. Should I write a bug-report to the xfs-guys? If yes, can I include your Email, Patrick? Regards Uli --=20 'The box said, 'Requires Windows 95 or better', so i installed Linux - TKK 5