Public SourceMage Discussion List

[David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>]

Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> On Jan 07, David Brown [dmlb2000 AT gmail.com] wrote:
>> I've been kinda curious as to the status of lvm (specifically lvm
>> root).  I know the iso has yet to support lvm root creation. There was
>> a wiki hack that referenced a bug that has since been reopened and
>> there are a couple of open lvm bugs and a couple of reopened lvm bugs.
> ...
>> The only unknown I have before I start on this venture is where the
>> state of the initscripts are. If someone with past experience and
>> knowledge of lvm could help me out with what works and what doesn't
>> (cause either it hasn't been done or it did and got dropped) that
>> would be much appreciated.
> 
> The open bugs remain accurate.  9177 is the main one.  The current problem
> (documented in that bug) is the order things are done in does not work with
> an LVM root/initrd.  http://bugs.sourcemage.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9177#c25
> lists the steps and the conflicting needs of the LVM root / non-LVM root
> setups.
> 
> What probably makes the most sense is to move all the LVM init stuff out to
> its own init script, make that part of the LVM spell, and give it logic to
> know when in the boot to run.
> 
> As for the other new stuff you're talking about, supporting that is all
> fine and well but we wouldn't want to just support one particular way of
> doing things.  Not that I claim to follow all of the bleeding edge kernel
> stuff or how it affects existing stuff.

Yeah, as long as we can still do it the "old" way (which is what we've
got right now) I don't have any problems with this. LVM root would be a
neat thing to do, but it will open up more problems. It's easy to forget
to build in the right parts and totally screw up your box. We'd need to
have a way to ensure that the ISO can be a rescue cd for a setup like
this as well. By rescue cd, I simply mean able to recognize and mount
the partitions.

David

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature