Bug#435983: mount: fails to detect LABEL=foo filesystems

On 8/9/07, Touko Korpela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 09:48:45AM +0100, James Youngman wrote: > > On 8/7/07, Touko Korpela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Please tell udev version installed. > > And please show mdadm version and c

Bug#435983: mount: fails to detect LABEL=foo filesystems

On 8/9/07, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Really. But if your problems are caused by LVM devices then you should > talk with the LVM maintainers too. OK. But FWIW I would have appreciated some advance warning that the configuration I was using [*] was deprecated and support would be

Bug#435983: mount: fails to detect LABEL=foo filesystems

On 8/8/07, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Aug 04, James Youngman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > LABEL=foo entries can no longer be mounted; > I love generalizations... > > > So, whatever populates /dev/disk/by-label is not aware of (LVM2

Bug#435983: mount: fails to detect LABEL=foo filesystems

On 8/7/07, Touko Korpela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please tell udev version installed. ~$ dpkg -l udev Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=ba

Bug#435983: mount: fails to detect LABEL=foo filesystems

On 8/5/07, LaMont Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 02:43:04PM +0100, James Youngman wrote: > > Everything worked fine 'til I upgraded... > > So, whatever populates /dev/disk/by-label is not aware of (LVM2 & MD), > > and since m

Bug#435983: mount: fails to detect LABEL=foo filesystems

Package: mount Version: 2.13~rc2-5 Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system Everything worked fine 'til I upgraded... LABEL=foo entries can no longer be mounted; this causes the system to be wholly unusable if (say) /usr is mounted via a labelled filesystem. I've been using LABE

Bug#432948: patch for debian bug 432948

The script /etc/init.d/mdadm-raid uses "set -u". That means that an error occurs if we refer to a variable which is unset. Unfortunately mdadm-raid calls log-daemon-msg with no value for $2. The end result is that "/etc/init.d/mdadm-raid stop" will fail. /lib/lsb/init-functions does not suffer

Bug#428794: Me too

This just bit me, too. It looks like we have multiple options to fix this, has one been selected? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#329358: [bug #14619] find -perm +... broken in 4.2.25

Update of bug #14619 (project findutils): Open/Closed:Open => Closed Fixed Release:None => 4.2.27 ___ Reply to this item at:

Bug#329358: [bug #14619] find -perm +... broken in 4.2.25

Update of bug #14619 (project findutils): Status:None => Fixed Assigned to:None => jay ___ Follow-up Comment #15: I have applied

Bug#329358: [bug #14619] find -perm +... broken in 4.2.25

Follow-up Comment #13, bug #14619 (project findutils): Andreas, did you intend both patch files to be applied, or just one of them? (I also must figure out where the upstream perm.texi file comes from) ___ Reply to this item at:

Bug#329358: [bug #14619] find -perm +... broken in 4.2.25

Follow-up Comment #6, bug #14619 (project findutils): I've moved the other issue that Eroc discovered to bug #14748. Andreas, do you have any further thoughts on this? If you still believe it's a bug I'll refer to the POSIX documentation and try to figure out a way forward. However, if in any

Bug#329358: [bug #14619] find -perm +... broken in 4.2.25

On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 08:19:45AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > The man page no longer documents the obsolete -perm +mode, which, as I > stated earlier, really only makes sense for symbolic modes starting with > 'a', or for numeric modes. The man page is wrong in stating that you must > specify 'u'

Bug#329358: [bug #14619] find -perm +... broken in 4.2.25

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #14619 (project findutils): Does -perm /... do what you expected -perm +... to do? ___ Reply to this item at: _

Bug#313081: [bug #13381] infinite loop with -follow.

Update of bug #13381 (project findutils): Open/Closed:Open => Closed Release:None => 4.2.19 Fixed Release:None => 4.2.22 ___

Bug#313081: [bug #13381] infinite loop with -follow.

Update of bug #13381 (project findutils): Severity: 3 - Normal => 6 - Security Status:None => Fixed Assigned to:None => jay ___

Bug#293666: Duplicate bug report

Bug 293725 appears to be a duplicate of 293666 (see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=293666) which is of severity 'Grave'. James. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]