Re: lvm-version -- beginning of wrapper (was: Re: lvm - I'll maintain it. - ITP lvm24)
On 2000-12-14 18:14, Arthur Korn wrote:
>lewis@sistina.com schrieb:
>> I can almost guarantee that the protocol will change during the 2.4.*
>> kernels. And I can also tell you that there is a backpatch for the 2.2.x
>> kernels. LVM 0.8.1 and LVM 0.9 work with both 2.2.x and 2.4.x.
>
>Regardless of this it should be possible to have multiple
>versions of the lvm tools installed at once, and it should Just
>Work (TM).
>
>Probably we should come up with a lvm-common package that
>contains a wrapper. I tried to script a LVM version detector,
>but don't have any other versions than 0.8i around, thus I'd
>appreciate if others could verify that this works:
>
>------ lvm-version
>#! /bin/sh
>
>set -e
>
># figure out the version of LVM in the kernel.
This is bad. Proc shouldn't be mounted if it isn't there. If you run "ps"
or "top" as root when /proc isn't mounted they don't try to mount it! The
principle of least surprise should be used here.
># mount proc in case it is not yet there
>if [ ! -f /proc/uptime ]; then
> [ -d /proc || mkdir /proc
> mount -t proc none /proc
>fi
>
># check for lvm support
>if [ ! -f /proc/lvm ]; then
modprobe lvm-mod
if [ ! -f /proc/lvm ]; then
> echo 'No lvm support in kernel.'
> exit 1
fi
>fi
>
># extract version number.
>head -1 /proc/lvm |tr ' ' "\n"|grep '[0-9]\.[0-9]'
>
>-----------
>
>Around this it should be fairly easy to write a wrapper.
I will consider this.
--
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: