On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 04:01:24PM +0200, Stefan Gybas wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 07:56:09AM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote: > > > I've fixed this. Does this also need to be done for > > parmfile.example1: > > Please undo your changes. Attaching the DASD 191 and 192 will confuse > dboostrap because these are typically CMS disks on VM systems which > can't be read by Linux. If you then select "partition a hard disk" > dboostrap will ask you to low-level format your DASDs which will > cause data loss! Doh, sorry. I've reverted it. > I'm not use it a valid range (say just 0001) will work. It might > cause trouble if this device is not a DASD at all so we decided to > use an invalid range and let the kernel just probe the DASDs without > attaching them. Could the ranges be omitted entirely? If not, is it possible to document what is happening in the parmfile itself? Matt
Attachment:
pgpz7wy7bTbYy.pgp
Description: PGP signature