On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 11:15:21AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Andrew Pollock wrote:
> > Okay, AFAIK the kernel d-i boots with for the installation process *doesn't*
> > have devfs enabled, so this could explain why the initial VG and LV creation
> > works...
>
> Yes, the d-i kernel does have devfs
Andrew Pollock wrote:
> Okay, AFAIK the kernel d-i boots with for the installation process *doesn't*
> have devfs enabled, so this could explain why the initial VG and LV creation
> works...
Yes, the d-i kernel does have devfs both compiled in and enabled by a
boot parameter.
--
see shy jo
sig
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 08:01:16PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 09:42:38AM +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
>
> [snip interesting stuff]
>
> >
> > That's interesting.
> >
> > It was always the case that if you have devfs in the kernel but not
> > mounted, the partition
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 09:42:38AM +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
[snip interesting stuff]
>
> That's interesting.
>
> It was always the case that if you have devfs in the kernel but not
> mounted, the partition names in /proc/partitions showed devfs names rather
> than "normal" /dev/sda* type
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 07:25:02PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
>
> I've just read #123069, and this is after I yesterday briefly had LVM up and
> running on a stock Debian kernel without devfs mount or devfsd installed.
>
> I shortly afterwards hosed the install and now have LVM on
Hi Patrick,
I've just read #123069, and this is after I yesterday briefly had LVM up and
running on a stock Debian kernel without devfs mount or devfsd installed.
I shortly afterwards hosed the install and now have LVM on top of a RAID1
device (again, without devfs involved, but with a stock kern
6 matches
Mail list logo
