From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: martin f krafft <madduck@madduck.net>
Subject: Re: Linux mdadm superblock question.
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:42:47 +1300
Message-ID: <20100213064247.GA19295@lapse.rw.madduck.net>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1002111758350.12031@p34.internal.lan>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-ripemd160;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pWyiEgJYm5f9v55/"
Return-path: <linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1002111758350.12031@p34.internal.lan>
Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-raid.ids


--pWyiEgJYm5f9v55/
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

also sprach Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com> [2010.02.12.1200 +1300]:
> I may be converting a host to ext4 and was curious, is 0.90 still the
> only superblock version for mdadm/raid-1 that you can boot from
> without having to create an initrd/etc?
>=20
> Are there any benefits to using a superblock > 0.90 for a raid-1 boot
> volume < 2TB?

FYI: http://bugs.debian.org/492897

--=20
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
=20
it may look like i'm just sitting here doing nothing.
but i'm really actively waiting
for all my problems to go away.
=20
spamtraps: madduck.bogus@madduck.net

--pWyiEgJYm5f9v55/
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="digital_signature_gpg.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREDAAYFAkt2SeAACgkQIgvIgzMMSnVdAgCfYgHkLwo6exYLXgNH9jPgf+hg
h2QAoKZFzpPVcN3QzMTziV0KaLiaYDYM
=eJA3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--pWyiEgJYm5f9v55/--