Re: In this partition scheme, grub does not find md information?

[Moshe Yudkowsky <moshe@pobox.com>]

David Greaves wrote:

> Moshe Yudkowsky wrote:
>> I expect it's because I used 1.2 superblocks (why
>> not use the latest, I said, foolishly...) and therefore the RAID10 --
> 
> Aha - an 'in the wild' example of why we should deprecate '0.9 1.0 1.1, 1.2' and
> rename the superblocks to data-version + on-disk-location :)

Even if renamed, I'd still need a Clue as to why to prefer one scheme 
over the other. For example, I've now learned that if I want to set up a 
RAID1 /boot, it must actually be 1.2 or grub won't be able to read it. 
(I would therefore argue that if the new version ever becomes default, 
then the default sub-version ought to be 1.2.)

As to the wiki: I am not certain I found the Wiki you're referring to; I 
did find others, and none had the ringing clarity of Peter's definitive 
"RAID10 won't work for /boot."

The process I'm going through -- cloning an old amd-k7 server into a new 
amd64 server -- is something I will document, and this particular grub 
issue is one of the things I intend to mention. So, where is this Wiki 
of which you speak?

-- 
Moshe Yudkowsky * moshe@pobox.com * www.pobox.com/~moshe
  "A kind word will go a long way, but a kind word and
   a gun will go even further."
    					-- Al Capone