Re: ANNOUNCE - mdadm 0.8 - candidate for 1.0

Re: ANNOUNCE - mdadm 0.8 - candidate for 1.0

[Luca Berra]

On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 02:55:43PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> Yes... I sort of noticed that in passing...
> 
> I added:
>    %_sbindir /sbin
>    %_sysconfdir /etc
> 
> to my .rpcmacros and rebuild the rpms so they now put files in the
> "right" places.
> 
> Any  RPM gurus want to suggest what I *should* do?
i am no guru but an alterantive seems to be setting
%define _exec_prefix %{nil}
in the spec file

> Is it wrong to use %_sbindir and $_sysconfdir ???
i believe common practice is using /sbin literaly in the
spec file, but i prefer the above thing

%_sysconfdir should be set to /etc in the per platform rpm macro file
/usr/lib/rpm/%{_target_cpu}-%{_vendor}-%{_target_os}
ie: /usr/lib/rpm/i386-redhat-linux

L.

-- 
Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it
        Communication Media & Services S.r.l.
 /"\
 \ /     ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
  X        AGAINST HTML MAIL
 / \

Re: ANNOUNCE - mdadm 0.8 - candidate for 1.0

[Neil Brown]

On Sunday April 7, bluca@comedia.it wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 02:55:43PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> > Yes... I sort of noticed that in passing...
> > 
> > I added:
> >    %_sbindir /sbin
> >    %_sysconfdir /etc
> > 
> > to my .rpcmacros and rebuild the rpms so they now put files in the
> > "right" places.
> > 
> > Any  RPM gurus want to suggest what I *should* do?
> i am no guru but an alterantive seems to be setting
> %define _exec_prefix %{nil}
> in the spec file

Thanks.  This looks like a reasonable suggestion.  And it seems to work.
> 
> > Is it wrong to use %_sbindir and $_sysconfdir ???
> i believe common practice is using /sbin literaly in the
> spec file, but i prefer the above thing
> 
> %_sysconfdir should be set to /etc in the per platform rpm macro file
> /usr/lib/rpm/%{_target_cpu}-%{_vendor}-%{_target_os}
> ie: /usr/lib/rpm/i386-redhat-linux

Hmmm. and debian's /usr/lib/rpm files set it to /usr/etc which doesn't
exist on debian :-(  I'll just assume that debian is broken and leave
_sysconfdir set to /etc in my .rpmmacros.

Thanks again,
NeilBrown

Re: ANNOUNCE - mdadm 0.8 - candidate for 1.0

[Neil Brown]

On Wednesday April 10, mooasun@yahoo.com wrote:
> 
>  Neil,
>  
> I tried with "mdadm -C /dev/md0 --level raid1 --raid-disks 2 /dev/hda1 --fail /dev/hdc1"
> to make a MD device with a faulty device. However, It did not work what I expected.
> I do not want to include /dev/hdc1 yet because it has the system image, but it tried to
> include it.
> Any suggestion?

Yes. If you don't want /dev/hdc1 to be included, don't include it.
If you say:

# mdadm -C /dev/md0 --level raid1 --raid-disks 2 /dev/hda1

It will say:

mdadm: You haven't given enough devices (real or missing) to create this array

The word "missing" is meant to be a hint, but I don't think it is
documented (I've just made a TODO note to fix that - thanks).

The command:

# mdadm -C /dev/md0 --level raid1 --raid-disks 2 /dev/hda1 missing

will create your array with /dev/hda1 in the first slot, and no device
in the second slot.

NeilBrown