From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maarten Subject: Re: lilo boot problems Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 02:22:23 +0200 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <200408310222.24563.maarten@ultratux.net> References: <200408251458.46575.maarten@ultratux.net> <200408280044.55286.maarten@ultratux.net> <20040830082625.GA9916@apartia.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20040830082625.GA9916@apartia.fr> Content-Disposition: inline To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Monday 30 August 2004 10:26, Louis-David Mitterrand wrote: > On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 12:44:55AM +0200, maarten wrote: > > On Friday 27 August 2004 15:04, Laurent CARON wrote: > > > maarten wrote: > > > > you have to reconstruct your array first. > > > > Eeh... You're joking, right ? > > The array holds no data as yet so it is possible, but several things seem > > too odd about this advice. First, there is nothing wrong with this > > array, it was created by mdadm with all the right options. Second, this > > being linux (not windows) I can hardly believe one has to solve problems > > by no other means than starting all over ("reinstall windows") if the > > only error is due to the bootmanager interacting with the kernel > > (remember, this error doesn't occur with other, earlier, kernels). > > > > Anyway, I chose to work around it by installing grub (and it works fine). > > By "reconstruct" I think Laurent meant "synchronize". In effect, > degraded arrays would produce that error with lilo with certain versions > of kernel 2.6.x Ah, okay. This would make sense, yes. But it creates a catch-22 situation because I can't add the missing drive to the array when I have booted off that single drive, and I can't boot off the array due to this lilo error. Not that that can't be fixed... Maarten