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

Re: 2.6 LVM problem



On Mon, 2004-05-10 at 11:38, David Cannings wrote:
> On Monday 10 May 2004 10:55, Andrew Ingram wrote:
> > /dev/mapper/control: open failed: No such device
> > Is device-mapper driver missing from kernel?
> > Warning: '/proc/partitions' does not match '/dev' directory structure.
> >     Name change: '/dev/lvma' -> '/dev/vg00/mythtvlv'
> > Added 2.6.5
> > Added 2.4.22-HT *
> > Device mapper is installed in the kernel. Some googling showed that 
> > this was the sort of message that people using DEVFS in their kernel
> > experienced. I'm not using DEVFS however.
> 
> Which kernel is device mapper built into?  If you were trying to run lilo 
> from your 2.4 kernel and hadn't got device mapper built into it you would 
> likely get that error.
> 
> As for 2.6, don't forget you will also need the newer LVM userspace tools.

David, you were absolutely right. The lilo error was down to the 2.4
kernel not having device mapper built in. Running lilo when running
under 2.6.5 produced no error.

I did update the lvm-common and lvm10 packages to the latest (I'm
running Sid btw). But this produced the same thing (no mounted lvm),
although I've noticed some additional errors during bootup now. Here is
a small bit from /var/log/boot:

...
All modules loaded.
Setting up LVM Volume Groups...
vgscan -- LVM driver/module not loaded?
vgchange -- LVM driver/module not loaded?
...


As far as I know, LVM is built into my kernel. In the menuconfig I
selected to build in the multi device support (didn't bother with RAID
since I dont need it). The section from my .config is as follows:
#
# Multi-device support (RAID and LVM)
#
CONFIG_MD=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_MD=m
# CONFIG_MD_LINEAR is not set
# CONFIG_MD_RAID0 is not set
# CONFIG_MD_RAID1 is not set
# CONFIG_MD_RAID5 is not set
# CONFIG_MD_RAID6 is not set
# CONFIG_MD_MULTIPATH is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_DM=y
# CONFIG_DM_CRYPT is not set


Is this enough or am I missing something?

Regards,
Andrew






Reply to: