On Wed, Mar 28, 2001 at 01:26:27AM -0600, Chad C. Walstrom wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 12:59:35AM -0600, Scott Dier wrote: > > * AJ Lewis <lewis@sistina.com> [010326 17:39]: > > > now. I'm working on packages for 0.9.1 Beta6 that will use a common/base > > > package to go between kernel versions, and should have them up on the > > > Sistina web site next week. Hopefully I will have 0.8 final packages up > > > > Next time, dont put the binaries in /usr/sbin. One of my friends tried > > out the sistina packages and had that problem and his /usr/sbin was on a > > LVM partition. > > > > Probally best to put some sort of install check in to make absoluetly > > sure /sbin isn't LVM mounted, and post a warning if it is at least. (via > > debconf, so it emails it at least.) > > Yeah, that friend was me. ;-) No worries. I had a handy copy of > tomsrtbt available and my / partition was not LVM'ed. No blood, no > foul. 8) > Anyway, if you need them sponsored, I can do so. I've talked to AJ > before about LVM, and I've talked with Tom. I've always been > reassured that Tom's packages were in incoming, however, I've never > seen them get past that barrier and make it into unstable. I've gotten three offers of sponsership in the last day. Thanks all! > If you haven't noticed, the lvm packages are versioned based on the IO > Protocol version or IOP. lvm-0.8final was IOP 5 or 6. > lvm-0.9.0-beta3 was something like 10, and now they're up to something > like IOP 11 with 0.9.0-beta6. Therefore, the lvm10 and lvm10-dev > packages refer to the IOP version 10 of the kernel patch and tools. > Packages for lvm-0.9.0-beta6 should be refered to as lvm11 and > lvm11-dev. Actually, beta6 is back to IOP10 as people didn't appreciate breaking compatibility with the default kernel. A valid argument. > It's all very confusing, yes, but the LVM developers have hashed out a > way to understand what version of the kernel IOP you are running and > use the tools appropriately. I do not believe that the latest tools > are backwards compatible with the older kernel IOP's though, so > updates to the lvm tools MUST BE accompanied by a kernel upgrade. > > Alas, I'm still running my beta3 packages on the 2.4.0 kernel, despite > some of the bugs that were reported against them. I'll sponsor the > packages in all their confusing splendor, since I have a vested > interest in maintaing LVM on my boxes: > > > lvscan -- ACTIVE "/dev/vg01/lv_usr" [2 GB] > lvscan -- ACTIVE "/dev/vg01/lv_tmp" [256 MB] > lvscan -- ACTIVE "/dev/vg01/lv_var" [1 GB] > lvscan -- ACTIVE "/dev/vg01/lv_usr_local" [812 MB] > lvscan -- ACTIVE "/dev/vg01/lv_home" [3 GB] > lvscan -- 5 logical volumes with 7.04 GB total in 1 volume group > lvscan -- 5 active logical volumes Yeah, I'm doing the same on all my boxens. my laptop looks like: lvscan -- ACTIVE "/dev/main/usr" [2 GB] lvscan -- ACTIVE "/dev/misc/var" [400 MB] lvscan -- ACTIVE Original "/dev/misc/home" [300 MB] lvscan -- ACTIVE Original "/dev/misc/foo" [72 MB] lvscan -- ACTIVE Snapshot "/dev/misc/snap1" [98.44 MB] of /dev/misc/home lvscan -- ACTIVE Snapshot "/dev/misc/snap2" [70.88 MB] of /dev/misc/foo lvscan -- 6 logical volumes with 2.92 GB total in 2 volume groups lvscan -- 6 active logical volumes > *grin* I'll give AJ a ring and hash out the detail so he can bring me > up to date with beta3. I'll still consider Tom MIA but genuinely > interested, as that was the last status I heard from him. If I > update, it'll be NMU under a no-reply situation from Tom... IF there's > enough interest among everyone here to update. Given that 2.4.0 uses > lvm-0.9-beta2, it would be a good idea to have at least lvm10 > available (or is it lvm9). > > See what a nightmare this is? That's what you get for bleeding edge > technology. We'll get this stabilized so people can just use it w/o getting motion sickness. Regards, -- AJ Lewis Sistina Software Inc. Voice: 612-379-3951 1313 5th St SE, Suite 111 Fax: 612-379-3952 Minneapolis, MN 55414 E-Mail: lewis@sistina.com http://www.sistina.com Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B 52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648 Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey (Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys) -----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote---------------------------------------- THE LESSER-KNOWN PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES #16: C- This language was named for the grade received by its creator when he submitted it as a class project in a graduate programming class. C- is best described as a "low-level" programming language. In fact, the language generally requires more C- statements than machine-code statements to execute a given task. In this respect, it is very similar to COBOL. -----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------
Attachment:
pgpbPQRw8fEa1.pgp
Description: PGP signature