Hi Ruben, Ruben van Staveren wrote:
Yes that's correct, so the sanity check should be >= 2.6.12, not just equal to 2.6.12?On 18 Jun 2008, at 16:07, Stefan Lambrev wrote:Last time I checked it was still 2.6.12. it still is set to that value on our 2950's (running 6.2 and linux_base-fc-4_9)I never saw 2.6.12 in documentation, but you may be right. Tough in ports/UPDATING only 2.6.16 is mention. http://blogs.freebsdish.org/netchild/category/freebsd/linuxolator/ speaks also only for 2.6.16 :)I got this from reading the commit message of r1.5 of http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/dev/mfi/mfi.cI don't know what the change set between 2.6.12 and 2.6.16 is regarding the linuxolator. As I see it the difference should only in more syscalls being supported. So if megacli has enough to get going on by setting it to just 2.6.12 it should not have a requirement for 2.6.16. Correct me if I am wrong (and I'll fix the instructions in the port)
Of course, if you think mfi(4) should support your board csup up to the latest stable and see whether it works. Also run through /usr/local/sbin/megacli instead of /usr/local/libexec/MegaCli as it will perform some sanity checks.
I do not have problems with mfi and megacli ;) It's the OP who have them.
People should only realise that they are running a linux binary under emulation in order to manage their mission critical servers. It is a thing you might not like.It has been always this way with lsi ? Actually the difference now is that we are forced to use tools under beta/experimental linuxolator ;)Sad but true. But I managed with ease to replace a hot spare not that long ago.You might want to have a peek at the cheat sheet hosted at http://tools.rapidsoft.de/perc/
nice site :)
Cheers,
Ruben
-- Best Wishes, Stefan Lambrev ICQ# 24134177 _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
