On 2010-03-06 1:53 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > On Saturday 06 March 2010 01:30:38 Tanstaafl wrote: >> So, again, does anyone know if the new version of lvm2 (with >> integrated device-mapper) will work ok on the 2.6.23 kernel, or is >> there a minimum version required?
> Again, this is in the ebuild. You can ignore most of the weird > details and look for important stuff. Dependencies are in DEPEND, and > in the case of the latest lvm2, the only important limits are: > > !!sys-fs/device-mapper >> =sys-apps/util-linux-2.16 Ok, good, I'm at 2.16.2 - and I guess they're not so scary as I remembered. I come from a Windows background, and I'm really enjoying learning linux, but still get a little intimidated sometimes. Next time I'll look first then ask only if I can't answer it for myself. Thanks for not taking my jab personally... > These are userspace tools so it's safe, you won't lose data or > functionality as long as you don't reboot in the middle. That's what I'd been able to glean from googling, but nothing really came out and just said it like that - so thanks. > You were talking about switching compilers then rebooting. There's > no requirement for a reboot in that step. I know, but in the parentheses I also said that after the switch I would rebuild world (and by implication the kernel) - and *that* is what I was worried about wrt rebooting - running on a kernel (in memory) that was compiled with a different version of the one (on disk). > Once you have successfully updated the box and it's kernel, then > reboot it to load the new kernel, but you can do that step whenever > you are ready. Got it... >> I was already leaning toward the kernel upgrade first as being the >> safest solution (then fix lvm2, then switch compilers, update everything >> else, then rebuild world), but I have to justify it to the boss, which >> is why I asked in the first place... > I suspect your kernel/compiler/lvm upgrad will be smooth and trouble-free. Me too, but like I said, I like to ask first - I've been bitten before by not asking simple questions prior to doing something that I *thought* should go ok, but had I asked the question, I'd have discovered the simple thing I should have done to avoid a real hassle... > If the box is old, and you have to switch to openrc/baselayout2, > that's where your troubles are going to happen. Ok, this is an older install, and I've been pretty good (until now) about keeping it pretty much up to date. gcc-4.3.4 only went stable on amd64 4-5 months ago and I don't usually wait this long to switch to it and rebuild world (I usually wait 1-2 months)... Baselayout2 is still not stable, so, yes, I'm still on baselayout1, and now you've gone and made me nervous again. ;) Are you suggesting I should already be using it?? > This is a deep change that touches many things with lots of configs > being updated and things moving around. Ok, where is the best place to go to start reading/learning about how to prep for it? > What version of those packages are you running, and what do you plan > to upgrade to, if at all? I certainly was not planning on updating to an unstable baselayout - why should I? I keep all critical system files at stable (gcc, baselayout, kernel, lvm, etc), and only occasionally run unstable/testing versions of apps like postfix, dovecot, etc if I want/need to... Now my main concern is, how long after baselayout2 goes stable before this become a real problem for systems still on baselayout1? Thanks again Andrew for your time and responses, its appreciated. -- Charles
