From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [172.16.48.31]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j217caK16263 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 02:38:36 -0500 Received: from percy.comedia.it (percy.comedia.it [212.97.59.71]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j217cYEW007509 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 02:38:34 -0500 Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 08:38:28 +0100 From: Luca Berra Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Having duplicate PV problems, think there's a bug in LVM2 md component detection Message-ID: <20050301073828.GC16775@percy.comedia.it> References: <20050228213856.GA4151@percy.comedia.it> <001101c51de4$ed5448c0$32dcdc0a@vanish> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <001101c51de4$ed5448c0$32dcdc0a@vanish> Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: LVM general discussion and development On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 05:29:11PM -0500, Ron Watkins wrote: >I am using LVM version 2.01.04 (2005-02-09). The Library Version is >1.01.00-ioctl (2005-01-17). The Driver Version is 4.1.0. (no date given). >I don't have any easy way to determine if the Debian maintainer is patching http://packages.debian.org/lvm2 >this. Should I be submitting the bug report directly to him/her/them >instead? well, they do explicitely add -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 to CFLAGS i wonder if this changes the lseek behaviour i'd try asking the debian maintainer first.... L. -- Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it Communication Media & Services S.r.l. /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \