Re: preseeding vs lvm
Patryk Ściborek writes: > But to my surprise it creates much bigger PV than I want: > [...] > And LV root takes all available space: Last time I checked it was impossible to preseed an LVM setup where not all the space was allocated. I had to resort to custom scripts invoked by custom partman menu items to achieve this. -- Regards, Feri. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ty3w565o@tac.ki.iif.hu
Du får 10% garantiavkastning och 50% kursskydd
Detta utskick är skapat i HTML, ditt e-postprogram stöder inte detta. Läs brevet på nedanstående adress: http://www.epmf.se/300084/open/r.asp?k=98844&i=4&c=54PLLEE1LL&h=8
Re: preseeding vs lvm
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 10:49:07 +0100, Ferenc Wagner wrote: > Patryk Ściborek writes: > > > But to my surprise it creates much bigger PV than I want: > > [...] > > And LV root takes all available space: > > Last time I checked it was impossible to preseed an LVM setup where not > all the space was allocated. I had to resort to custom scripts invoked > by custom partman menu items to achieve this. I was under the impression that one could sepcify a 'keep' partition to leave space unallocated, as seen here: http://hands.com/d-i/squeeze/classes/partition/lvm-spare/preseed I'm pretty sure I've used that for real deployments (please tell me if you think it doesn't work). Obviously you'll want to waeve those snippets into your own scripts, unless you also adopt the superstruture in the ditrectories above. Also, I'm surprised that I couldn't instantly find the relevant docs. We should probably fix this. We still seem to have references to the old home in svn in the manual, whereas we probably ought to be pointing at somewhere like: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=d-i/debian-installer.git;a=blob_plain;f=doc/devel/partman-auto-recipe.txt;hb=HEAD (not that that makes it clear that keep works with LVM, but it doesn't say it doesn't) Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]http://www.hands.com/ |-| HANDS.COM Ltd.http://www.uk.debian.org/ |(| 10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London E18 1NE ENGLAND pgpWoqcyDTHiq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: preseeding vs lvm
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Philip Hands wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 10:49:07 +0100, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>> Patryk Ściborek writes:
>>
>> > But to my surprise it creates much bigger PV than I want:
>> > [...]
>> > And LV root takes all available space:
>>
>> Last time I checked it was impossible to preseed an LVM setup where not
>> all the space was allocated. I had to resort to custom scripts invoked
>> by custom partman menu items to achieve this.
>
> I was under the impression that one could sepcify a 'keep' partition to
> leave space unallocated, as seen here:
>
> http://hands.com/d-i/squeeze/classes/partition/lvm-spare/preseed
>
> I'm pretty sure I've used that for real deployments (please tell me if
> you think it doesn't work).
>
> Obviously you'll want to waeve those snippets into your own scripts,
> unless you also adopt the superstruture in the ditrectories above.
>
> Also, I'm surprised that I couldn't instantly find the relevant docs.
> We should probably fix this. We still seem to have references to the
> old home in svn in the manual, whereas we probably ought to be pointing
> at somewhere like:
>
> http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=d-i/debian-installer.git;a=blob_plain;f=doc/devel/partman-auto-recipe.txt;hb=HEAD
>
> (not that that makes it clear that keep works with LVM, but it doesn't
> say it doesn't)
I made a partition to fill empty space. What's interesting it works
only if this partition is before PV:
2048 5 2048 ext3\
$primary{ } $bootable{ }\
method{ format } format{ } \
use_filesystem{ } filesystem{ ext3 }\
mountpoint{ /boot } \
. \
2048 1 10 ext3 \
$primary{ } \
method{ keep } \
. \
51200 10 51200 ext3 \
$primary{ } \
method{ lvm } vg_name{ servervg } \
. \
When I change order to:
2048 5 2048 ext3\
$primary{ } $bootable{ }\
method{ format } format{ } \
use_filesystem{ } filesystem{ ext3 }\
mountpoint{ /boot } \
. \
51200 10 51200 ext3 \
$primary{ } \
method{ lvm } vg_name{ servervg } \
. \
2048 1 10 ext3 \
$primary{ } \
method{ keep } \
. \
It uses last partition as PV...
Unfortunately there is similar problem with logical volumes. I have:
100% 1 100% linux-swap \
$lvmok{ } \
in_vg{ servervg } lv_name{ swap } \
method{ swap } format{ }\
. \
20480 10 20480 ext3 \
$lvmok{ } \
in_vg{ servervg } lv_name{ root } \
method{ format } format{ } \
use_filesystem{ } filesystem{ ext3 }\
mountpoint{ / } \
. \
2048 1000 10 ext3 \
$lvmok{ } \
in_vg{ servervg } lv_name{ removeme } \
method{ keep } \
.
If root definition is first it creates LV which fills whole VG. If
something else is first, it says that LV can't be created (I don't
remember exact message).
I think I will try something like this:
http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-boot@lists.debian.org/msg88630.html
Regards,
Patryk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/CAEHqL6ds_e9Dx6ZpazJaw8ivsrwMxU=m4zu9ttdj3nfk7jd...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#656141: debian-installer: cannot create partitions on RAID5 device
Package: debian-installer Version: debian-installer for testing Severity: important Using debian testing installer (downloaded it some hour's ago): Environment is virtualbox host with 4 drives. 1. selected Manual for Partitioning Method. 2. created a new partition on each of the 4 disks 3. selected configure RAID 4. wrote changes to disks 5. selected RAID5 6. selected 4 devices for active and 0 for spare 7. wrote changes, finish with RAID 8. partitioner now shows a RAID5 device with one partition with the full size of the device (which I cannot delete in order to create my desired partitions) Why is that? I would have expected to find 'free space' under the new raid device and be able to create partitions as I like. I also find strange that I see from a console that there is /dev/md0 but no partitions (I guess it would look like /dev/md0p1)... I worked around this by creating partitions with fdisk on the /dev/md0 (which resulted in /dev/md0p1 and /dev/md0p2) and all went smoothly afterwards. -- System Information: Debian Release: 6.0.3 APT prefers stable-updates APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120116205438.14082.84.reportbug@mordor
Debian installer build: failed or old builds
Debian installer build overview --- Failed or old builds: * OLD BUILD:mipsel Jan 15 00:09 buildd@rem build_cobalt_netboot-2.6_serial http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/mipsel/daily/build_cobalt_netboot-2.6_serial.log * OLD BUILD:mipsel Jan 15 00:12 buildd@rem build_cobalt_netboot-2.6_ssh http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/mipsel/daily/build_cobalt_netboot-2.6_ssh.log * OLD BUILD:mipsel Jan 15 00:13 buildd@rem build_cobalt_netboot-2.6_common http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/mipsel/daily/build_cobalt_netboot-2.6_common.log * OLD BUILD:mipsel Jan 15 00:17 buildd@rem build_malta_netboot-2.6 http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/mipsel/daily/build_malta_netboot-2.6.log * OLD BUILD:mipsel Jan 15 00:20 buildd@rem build_sb1-bcm91250a_netboot-2.6 http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/mipsel/daily/build_sb1-bcm91250a_netboot-2.6.log * OLD BUILD:mipsel Jan 15 00:23 buildd@rem build_loongson-2f_netboot-2.6 http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/mipsel/daily/build_loongson-2f_netboot-2.6.log Totals: 162 builds (0 failed, 6 old) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1rmxpa-0007ie...@ravel.debian.org
Installation & Live CD
This is just a bit of feedback from my perspective. I love Debian, and have used it for years, but I have a few comments about the state of affairs as they stand right now. First, you are doing a great disservice to the project by separating the installation and live cd into two different downloads, and by burying the live cd into sub-pages. If you really want people to test Debian and then install right away, you would make a live cd that can install right away, and have a link to that image right off the front page, rather than make people search for it, which only works if they know to begin with that they must search for it. One other comment, the installation interface looks like it came from the 1980's, with 8-bit graphics, which also doesn't install confidence. I am not proposing a brain-dead "Unity" or "Gnome 3.x" approach, just saying that a 1980's interface will simply turn away all but the most hard core user. I'm only providing this feedback because I love Debian and understand that the more acceptance it has, the more freedom the developers have to create a truly powerful and useful OS. Without a lot of "buy in," Debian will be relegated to only a small fringe of users. If that is your use model, well then I understand, but this means that dumbed down OS' like Ubuntu will win the race, which is ultimately a detriment to anyone that is interested in an OS that lends to productivity. KEK -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1325723772.2035.14.camel@edda-m -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1325723772.2035.14.camel@edda-m
Processed: submitter change - unarchived bugs
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> submitter 238366 !
Bug #238366 [partman-target] [mips] Should allow only ext2 and ext3 for the
partition containing /boot
Changed Bug submitter to 'Nicholas Breen ' from
'nbr...@ofb.net (Nicholas Breen)'
> submitter 621874 !
Bug #621874 [wnpp] ITP: votca -- Versatile Object-oriented Toolkit for
Coarse-graining Applications
Changed Bug submitter to 'Nicholas Breen ' from 'Nicholas
Breen '
> submitter 626336 !
Bug #626336 {Done: Nicholas Breen } [blacs-mpi] blacs-mpi:
Please add support for MPICH2 (libmpich2-dev) builds
Changed Bug submitter to 'Nicholas Breen ' from 'Nicholas
Breen '
> submitter 631353 !
Bug #631353 [developers-reference] developers-reference: Section 5.6.2: delayed
queue goes to 15-day, not 8
Changed Bug submitter to 'Nicholas Breen ' from 'Nicholas
Breen '
> submitter 646417 !
Bug #646417 {Done: Andreas Tille } [src:debian-science]
debian-science: Please update MPI implementations in distributedcomputing task
Changed Bug submitter to 'Nicholas Breen ' from 'Nicholas
Breen '
> submitter 646418 !
Bug #646418 [src:gpivtools] gpivtools: Please update Depends: on MPI Python
packages
Changed Bug submitter to 'Nicholas Breen ' from 'Nicholas
Breen '
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
646418: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=646418
626336: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=626336
238366: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=238366
646417: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=646417
631353: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=631353
621874: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=621874
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.132678418113290.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
