Public SourceMage Discussion List

["Jeremy A. Kolb" <jkolb AT brandeis.edu>]

On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, Eric Sandall wrote:

> Quoting Thomas Orgis <thomas-forum AT orgis.org>:
> > Am Thu, 4 Jan 2007 11:56:45 -0600
> > schrieb Jeremy Blosser <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>:
> >
> >
> >> over that init.d issue speaks volumes on what we're currently actually
> >> [...]
> >> open that long?  It's even 99% diagnosed, it "just" needs fixing.
> >> Obviously I haven't had time, but I find it hard to belive *no one else*
> >> has had time either.
> >
> > I'd add that apparently noone is affected by the prognosted failure   
> > except perhaps the reporter of that old bug?
> > We didn't support any device mapper targets that were set up in   
> > initrd/initramfs until I thought it would be cool to use suspend2   
> > with encrypted swap.
> > I encrypted my swap, fiddled around with busybox to get my initramfs  
> >  and then added this dmsetup call that rediscovers the volumes on   
> > "real" boot before mount in the init script.
> > No rocket science (well, the init.d part at least;-), all it needed   
> > was a _use case_.
> > We at least need one LVM root setup that could be bitten by the bug   
> > to test the fix on. For me that means setting up some spare box with  
> >  LVM root from scratch (since I didn't do any LVM stuff yet... only   
> > bare device-mapper for encryption).
> > Isn't there ANYONE among our devs who has LVM root or at least basic  
> >  LVM experience and some hardware to quickly set up the test case?
> > If no, then perhaps we should just push stable out and wait for any   
> > complaint to happen (we could warn about LVM root in release   
> > notes... eh... if we had such a thing on scribe update).
> 
> I have some LVM experiences, and spare boxes laying around, but I'm  
> about to pick up a third part-time job to help pay for my wedding that  
> I still need to finish planning ;), so my free time is rapidly  
> decreasing :(.
> 
> -sandalle
> 
> 

Wedding?  Congratulations!

Jeremy