[linux-lvm] RH7.2 + kernel 2.4.17(or 16) + LVM 1.0.2

[linux-lvm] RH7.2 + kernel 2.4.17(or 16) + LVM 1.0.2

[Chris Rutledge]

RH7.2 + kernel 2.4.17(or 16) + LVM 1.0.2

	Has anyone tried this combo yet? After build of LVM and the new
ernel( everything compiled like clock work ) the system hangs on reboot
 only after creation of a VG and mounting an LV) ...it searches for the boot
devices, finds it and then hangs. I thought it could have been the new
kernel so I rebuilt the system ( with kernel 2.4.17 + LVM ) prior to
creating a VG and LV I rebooted a few times and no problem.

	I just wanted to see if anyone else has had the same problem, so I've
provided no details. If not, I'll just call it "operator head space" and go
back through the docs. If anyone is interested in details for there own
knowledge or the project...I will be more than happy to supply them.


Thanks,
Chris

Re: [linux-lvm] RH7.2 + kernel 2.4.17(or 16) + LVM 1.0.2

[Anders Widman]

You should make sure you do NOT use GCC that comes with RH 7.2 as it is
broken.

I am using GCC 3.03 and Kernel 2.4.18-rc1 (though I have tried most
kernels since 2.4.10) with LVM 1.0.2 with ReiserFS ontop. This is
working fine.


//Anders



> RH7.2 + kernel 2.4.17(or 16) + LVM 1.0.2

>         Has anyone tried this combo yet? After build of LVM and the new
> ernel( everything compiled like clock work ) the system hangs on reboot
>  only after creation of a VG and mounting an LV) ...it searches for the boot
> devices, finds it and then hangs. I thought it could have been the new
> kernel so I rebuilt the system ( with kernel 2.4.17 + LVM ) prior to
> creating a VG and LV I rebooted a few times and no problem.

>         I just wanted to see if anyone else has had the same problem, so I've
> provided no details. If not, I'll just call it "operator head space" and go
> back through the docs. If anyone is interested in details for there own
> knowledge or the project...I will be more than happy to supply them.


> Thanks,
> Chris



> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html

[OT]: Re: [linux-lvm] RH7.2 + kernel 2.4.17(or 16) + LVM 1.0.2

[Kirby C. Bohling]

	That is a curious remark, on several occasions Alan Cox has said that he 
compiles and runs his kernels using a current RedHat compiler.  His 
kernel releases are generally known for their stability.  There were 
known problems with certain versions, but the recent releases I believe 
both of them from 7.1 and 7.2 are fine.  In fact, as a general rule the 
LKML recommends not using a 3.X compiler (they do it, but not for 
production systems as I recall).

A little googling comes up with this:

http://kltp.kldp.org/eunjea/fun/archive/0000.html

I know there are several better ones, but I don't have time to hunt them 
down right now.

Read that thread and there are several prominate hackers that say 
2.96.XX where XX > 76 work fine (some of them don't work for RH :-).

Take both Anders and my advice with a grain of salt.  We say opposite 
things, the most telling piece of advice is read the Documentation in 
the kernel tree and notice it claims the RH compiler should work but 
that some other random version is the preferred compiler, and 3.0.X 
isn't anywhere on that list as of Nov of last year according to the thread.

The only other question is what does sistina test there code with?  I 
would use that one.  But then again you the original poster didn't ask 
about that.  I doubt your problems involve any of this information.


	Thanks,
		Kirby

Anders Widman wrote:
> You should make sure you do NOT use GCC that comes with RH 7.2 as it is
> broken.
> 
> I am using GCC 3.03 and Kernel 2.4.18-rc1 (though I have tried most
> kernels since 2.4.10) with LVM 1.0.2 with ReiserFS ontop. This is
> working fine.
> 
> 
> //Anders
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>RH7.2 + kernel 2.4.17(or 16) + LVM 1.0.2
>>
> 
>>        Has anyone tried this combo yet? After build of LVM and the new
>>ernel( everything compiled like clock work ) the system hangs on reboot
>> only after creation of a VG and mounting an LV) ...it searches for the boot
>>devices, finds it and then hangs. I thought it could have been the new
>>kernel so I rebuilt the system ( with kernel 2.4.17 + LVM ) prior to
>>creating a VG and LV I rebooted a few times and no problem.
>>
> 
>>        I just wanted to see if anyone else has had the same problem, so I've
>>provided no details. If not, I'll just call it "operator head space" and go
>>back through the docs. If anyone is interested in details for there own
>>knowledge or the project...I will be more than happy to supply them.
>>
> 
> 
>>Thanks,
>>Chris
>>
> 
> 
> 
>>_______________________________________________
>>linux-lvm mailing list
>>linux-lvm@sistina.com
>>http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
>>read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> 

[linux-lvm] snapshot safetynet?

[Steve Wray]

Ok, heres a thought;
Resizing filesystems is a risky operation,
by and large, especially shrinking them.

So I had the thought;
Take a snapshot of the filesystem to shrink,
use fs tools and lvm tools to shrink it,
if it goes wrong, restore the snapshot!

Will it work tho? I'm wondering it lvreduce
will get confused about the snapshot or if
the snapshot system will cope with such a huge
change...

Re: [linux-lvm] snapshot safetynet?

[Anselm Kruis]

On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Steve Wray wrote:

> Ok, heres a thought;
> Resizing filesystems is a risky operation,
> by and large, especially shrinking them.
> 
> So I had the thought;
> Take a snapshot of the filesystem to shrink,
> use fs tools and lvm tools to shrink it,
> if it goes wrong, restore the snapshot!

I'vd done something similar. I use a patch to enable writes on snapshots.
Once I had to shrink a root filesytem on LVM. I created an writeable
snapshot, rebooted with the snapshot as root filesystem. Thisway the real 
root fs wasn't mounted and I could shrink it without problems.

> 
> Will it work tho? I'm wondering it lvreduce
> will get confused about the snapshot or if
> the snapshot system will cope with such a huge
> change...
No problem. But I use a patched LVM to allow writeable snapshots.

> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> 

---
 Anselm Kruis                                 Tel. +49 (0)89-356386-74
 science + computing ag		              FAX  +49 (0)89-356386-37
 Ingolstädter Str. 22             mailto: A.Kruis@science-computing.de
 D-80807 München                 WWW: http://www.science-computing.de/

**********************************************************************
***     CeBIT 2002                                                 ***
***     Besuchen Sie uns auf der CeBIT vom 13.-20.03.2002          ***
***     auf dem Messegelände in Hannover, Halle 11                 ***
**********************************************************************

Re: [OT]: Re: [linux-lvm] RH7.2 + kernel 2.4.17(or 16) + LVM 1.0.2

[Benjamin Scott]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Kirby C. Bohling wrote:
>> You should make sure you do NOT use GCC that comes with RH 7.2 as it is
>> broken.
>
> That is a curious remark, on several occasions Alan Cox has said that he
> compiles and runs his kernels using a current RedHat compiler.

  The "GCC 2.96" that Red Hat ships is still (1) not a "real" GCC release
and (2) rather new.  GCC 3.x is a "real" release but is even newer.  Both
may have behaviors with LVM does not like.  The LVM code may have bugs which
the more "traditional" GCC 2.91 allows but newer GCCs do not.

  All in all, while Red Hat's "GCC 2.96" may work, it is a good idea to try
a more conservative compiler release when problems occur.

-- 
Ben Scott <bscott@ntisys.com>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not |
| necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or  |
| organization.  All information is provided without warranty of any kind.  |