Re: Applying the kernel-patch-2.2.10-raid 2.2.10-3 to 2.2.15
(comments near the end)
On Wed, May 17, 2000 at 09:05:34PM +1000, bug1 wrote:
> Mike Bilow wrote:
> >
> > All I can tell you is that I manually extracted the binaries using "dpkg
> > --extract raidtools2_0.90.990824-5.deb" onto a floppy disk and they worked
> > fine when booted from the the install disks. In fact, I just checked
> > manually, and the only required libs are ld-linux.so.2 (the dynamic
> > linker) and libc.so.6 (the main glibc run-time). I have not checked, but
> > I think even busybox requires these.
> >
> > -- Mike
> >
> > On 2000-05-16 at 23:52 -0700, Bill Jennings wrote:
> >
> > > These will need to be statically-linked programs, as the
> > > boot floppies do not have the correct shared libraries to
> > > run the standard binaries.
> > * * *
> > > I've done this several times now. It's a pain, but once you
> > > get past the base install, it's pretty much business as
> > > usual.
> >
>
> The boot floppys generate stripped down libraries to specifically cater
> only for specified binaries. This is done to greatly reduce the size of
> libraries for the floppies.
>
> If the binaries from raidtools2 work with the libraries supplied from
> boot-floppies then i would say that its a bit of a conincidence, dont
> expect all binaries to run.
In fact I tried this a few months ago, and the raid tools
did not run (missing or stripped-down libraries). I then
re-compiled them statically-linked and they worked fine (but
were about 200k each).
> After base is installed the proper (full) libraries will be installed,
> so dynamicly linked raidtools2 binaries will run.
>
> The best i could recomend for raid installs is to install
> base+raidtools2 and then move things around, root raid isnt really a
> good idea anyway (except for raid1)
Root raid was the whole reason for this thread. You have to
be running raid before you install the base, or you don't
get your root partition raid. As I said above, once you get
past the base install, it's pretty much business as usual.
> Making statically linked raidtools binaries would work and wouldnt take
> much space, but most people probably wouldnt need them statically
> linked, how far do you go with static packages ?
I have found a statically linked fdisk, raid-tools, and
chroot to be indespensible when building servers with
non-standard configurations.
> It would be great to have an install that handles raid2 and lvm, but it
> wont be happening with potato.
Yeah, I've got a set of special boot floppies for doing
root-raid servers now. But I haven't hacked dbootstrap yet
to do the mounting of md0, etc. Being able to start a shell
on a secont VT has obviated the need for it right away.
> Glenn
-bj :-)
Reply to: