From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maarten van den Berg Subject: Re: mdadm - comments on command layout Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:46:43 +0200 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <200408141646.43625.maarten@ultratux.net> References: <16669.9163.392465.637229@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <16670.1701.954970.773800@cse.unsw.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Return-path: In-Reply-To: <16670.1701.954970.773800@cse.unsw.edu.au> Content-Disposition: inline To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Saturday 14 August 2004 14:33, Neil Brown wrote: > On Friday August 13, stoffel@lucent.com wrote: > > Hi Neil, > > > > I've been using mdadm recently to work with some arrays and I really > > have to say I dislike how the commands are laid out and used. First > > off, they're not consistent from one usage to another. Of course, I'm > > going to be jerk and not give good examples since my personal box at > > home is down and I'm at work. But the idea is that when you assemble > > a RAID device, it should look similiar to how you manage that raid > > device. > > Examples would really help. In my mind it is very regular. There is > some room for flexibility, but generally, the usage is > > mdadm --mode --option... /dev/md-device [ component devices ... ] Hi Neil, In my mind, either the manpage is somewhat confusing, or the program is. >From the exact syntax above I would assume that to (hot)add a device I need to type 'mdadm --manage -a ...'. But just 'mdadm -a ...' is enough. So is the case for some other modes. The syntax given isn't mdadm [--mode] --option , so one would assume just omitting --manage would lead to an error. This was, I mean still is, indeed confusing to me. There is another bit. Quoting from the manpage you first have MODES, then the 6 modi are explained, and directly thereafter comes OPTIONS, but some of them seem to list modes, not options: -A, --assemble -B, --build -C, --create etc. So that leaves a big question; is it a mode, an option...? The whole mode thing is either not clear to _me_, or it is somewhat confusing in general. I wouldn't really suggest that typing 'mdadm -a' instead of 'mdadm --manage -a' should lead to an error, but the concept of the modi now makes little sense (to me personally). But maybe I just misunderstood things. . So moving the -A, -B etc. "options" to the section "modes" above, adding a -M --manage mode there as well might make everything clearer. (That's just MHO.) But anyhow, the program does what it's supposed to do, so... :-) Respectfully, Maarten -- When I answered where I wanted to go today, they just hung up -- Unknown