Qrux wrote: > If you're not testing kernel operations that handle bare-metal (e.g., > physical hardware drivers), you can do FS-related testing (or > anything higher-level than the FS) even more easily (from a > disk-space perspective) with VMs.
Wait for it. Hopefully later tonight in BLFS. > The only case I see for needing to boot into LVM is for managing > partitions over 2TB, though it seems like parted could handle that > pretty easily (I can't verify; I'm a 32-bit fdisk fan). BLFS does have parted, jfs, and xfs. They will handle a 2T+ partition. jfs will handle 32P partitions. xfs will handle 16E partitions. T = 2^40 bytes P = 2^50 bytes E = 2^60 bytes The largest dive I can find right now is 4T, so I guess I need to go get 8192 of those to get to a 32P partitions. :) I'll have to wait for one of those 16E partitions. :) > I'm just a > user, but I tend to agree that for LFS, purity (and simplicity) is > good. Not even sure that md would be a good inclusion for LFS. It will be fine for BLFS. > Maybe consider a "Booting- and Hardware-Related Options" section for > BLFS? See BLFS 5. File Systems. Already includes lvm2 (but not how to use it). -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page