[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#418757: marked as done (information about aacraid missing from /proc)

Your message dated Sat, 18 Jul 2009 00:37:04 +0200
with message-id <20090717223704.GA28651@galadriel.inutil.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#418757: Debian Etch: Patch: /proc/scsi/aacraid missing
has caused the Debian Bug report #418757,
regarding information about aacraid missing from /proc
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org

418757: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=418757
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.18.dfsg.1-12
Tags: patch

Looks like change of behavior of newer GCCs triggered a bug which causes
the /proc/scsi/aacraid directory tree (which I understand contains
information useful to array monitoring) not to appear.

Please see the following link for an explanation and a patch.


I wonder if this could still make it into etch with the other fixes for
kernel that were mentioned.

Marcin Owsiany <porridge@debian.org>             http://marcin.owsiany.pl/
GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216  FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75  D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 09:00:17AM +1200, Ewen McNeill wrote:
> In message <20080611053514.GB13860@colo.lackof.org>, dann frazier writes:
> >On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 04:28:49PM +1200, Ewen McNeill wrote:
> >> Amongst other things this prevents using the Dell afacli management tool
> >> to monitor/manage the RAID arrays, since it checks for
> >> /proc/scsi/aacraid and aborts if [/proc/scsi/aacraid] is not found.
> >> [Trivial patch, from Dell engineers]
> >
> >Thanks Ewen. The first step in getting it into Debian would be to make
> >sure it gets upstream. 
> Thanks for the prompt response.
> I've checked the Linux 2.6.24 kernel source (eg, as in Testing now) and
> it's not present there.  I also emailed the two Dell engineers listed on
> the original patch and they tell me that the subsystem maintainer
> rejected their patch due to the move away from using procfs for such
> information (to using sysfs instead).  Apparently Dell got their core
> management tool updated to use the new interface (by the third party
> supplier), but it looks like the command line management tool I want to
> use never got updated.
> I understand your reluctance to carry a special patch in Debian, but
> I do note that this appears to be a feature regression from Sarge ->
> Etch as Marcin Owsiany noted 14 months ago (since the /proc interface
> was present in Sarge and gone in Etch, and the tool seems to have worked
> with Sarge but doesn't work with Etch, due to changes in the way the
> compiler handled uninitialised data and the things that needed to be
> set to make the proc file appear).
> Perhaps it's now too late to do anything about this.

Indeed, closing the bug now.


--- End Message ---

Reply to: