FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux General Discussion

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-06-2010, 11:43 AM
Tom Gundersen
 
Default patches to initscripts

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
> https://github.com/teg/initscripts-arch/commit/b4c804d60d6e8361db3f19bf3a2fa6fb58ee8458
>
> Two short comments about this commit:
>
> 1) We need to run vgchange again after rw-mounting everything (without
> --sysinit), so monitoring can be set up.
> 2) mkinitcpio's LVM hook also needs --sysinit.
>
> The rest of the patches are fine.

Thanks to Thomas and Dave for fast feedback. I pushed a few more
commits to my trees to address their comments:

<https://github.com/teg/initscripts-arch/>
<https://github.com/teg/mkinitcpio/>

Finally, here is a patch for mkinitcpio's LVM hook (don't know if this
is the best way to contribute to svn repo's...):


--- lvm2_hook 2010-12-06 13:20:10.588544437 +0100
+++ lvm2_hook 2010-12-06 13:25:22.838755236 +0100
@@ -20,6 +20,6 @@
msg "Scanning logical volumes..."
eval /sbin/lvm vgscan --ignorelockingfailure $LVMQUIET
msg "Activating logical volumes..."
- eval /sbin/lvm vgchange --ignorelockingfailure
--ignoremonitoring -ay $LVMQUIET
+ eval /sbin/vgchange --sysinit -a y $LVMQUIET
fi
}
 
Old 12-06-2010, 11:52 AM
Thomas Bächler
 
Default patches to initscripts

Am 06.12.2010 13:43, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
>> https://github.com/teg/initscripts-arch/commit/b4c804d60d6e8361db3f19bf3a2fa6fb58ee8458
>>
>> Two short comments about this commit:
>>
>> 1) We need to run vgchange again after rw-mounting everything (without
>> --sysinit), so monitoring can be set up.
>> 2) mkinitcpio's LVM hook also needs --sysinit.
>>
>> The rest of the patches are fine.
>
> Thanks to Thomas and Dave for fast feedback. I pushed a few more
> commits to my trees to address their comments:
>
> <https://github.com/teg/initscripts-arch/>
> <https://github.com/teg/mkinitcpio/>

Thanks. The initscripts patch won't work though:

[[ $USELVM =~ yes|YES && -x /sbin/lvm && -d /sys/block ]] || return
"return" is a statement that will only work inside a function. I don't
know what it will do on the top level, but certainly not what you'd expect.

> Finally, here is a patch for mkinitcpio's LVM hook (don't know if this
> is the best way to contribute to svn repo's...):
>
>
> --- lvm2_hook 2010-12-06 13:20:10.588544437 +0100
> +++ lvm2_hook 2010-12-06 13:25:22.838755236 +0100
> @@ -20,6 +20,6 @@
> msg "Scanning logical volumes..."
> eval /sbin/lvm vgscan --ignorelockingfailure $LVMQUIET
> msg "Activating logical volumes..."
> - eval /sbin/lvm vgchange --ignorelockingfailure
> --ignoremonitoring -ay $LVMQUIET
> + eval /sbin/vgchange --sysinit -a y $LVMQUIET
> fi
> }
>

Heh, there is no good way, sadly.
 
Old 12-06-2010, 02:48 PM
Tom Gundersen
 
Default patches to initscripts

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
> Thanks. The initscripts patch won't work though:
>
> [[ $USELVM =~ yes|YES && -x /sbin/lvm && -d /sys/block ]] || return
> "return" is a statement that will only work inside a function. I don't
> know what it will do on the top level, but certainly not what you'd expect.

D'oh! Copy-paste error, sorry about that.

Updated commit:
<https://github.com/teg/initscripts-arch/commit/feef447b8368244525dd98582b662a369098b2f7>.

Thanks for testing,

Tom
 
Old 12-06-2010, 11:10 PM
Thomas Bächler
 
Default patches to initscripts

Am 06.12.2010 16:48, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
>> Thanks. The initscripts patch won't work though:
>>
>> [[ $USELVM =~ yes|YES && -x /sbin/lvm && -d /sys/block ]] || return
>> "return" is a statement that will only work inside a function. I don't
>> know what it will do on the top level, but certainly not what you'd expect.
>
> D'oh! Copy-paste error, sorry about that.
>
> Updated commit:
> <https://github.com/teg/initscripts-arch/commit/feef447b8368244525dd98582b662a369098b2f7>.
>
> Thanks for testing,
>
> Tom
>

I pushed everything to the official git tree.

There's one more thing about the check in the SWAP area of the crypttab
code: Instead of using isLuks to check for a LUKS device, check with
blkid whether there is any valid file system signature on it.

The problem is: If blkid finds more than one valid signature, it will
not return anything, and we will mistakenly believe that there is no
file system (and happily overwrite the drive). This part of initscripts
is giving me a headache everytime I touch it.
 
Old 12-06-2010, 11:17 PM
Tom Gundersen
 
Default patches to initscripts

On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
> I pushed everything to the official git tree.

Great!

> There's one more thing about the check in the SWAP area of the crypttab
> code: Instead of using isLuks to check for a LUKS device, check with
> blkid whether there is any valid file system signature on it.
>
> The problem is: If blkid finds more than one valid signature, it will
> not return anything, and we will mistakenly believe that there is no
> file system (and happily overwrite the drive). This part of initscripts
> is giving me a headache everytime I touch it.

Hmmm... Interesting... I'll put this on my mental TODO list and have a
look next time I have time.

Cheers,

Tom
 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:30 PM
Dieter Plaetinck
 
Default patches to initscripts

On Tue, 07 Dec 2010 01:10:12 +0100
Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:

> The problem is: If blkid finds more than one valid signature, it will
> not return anything, and we will mistakenly believe that there is no
> file system (and happily overwrite the drive). This part of
> initscripts is giving me a headache everytime I touch it.
>

what do the util-linux-ng maintainers say about that?
Isn't this something that should be fixed in the blkid source code?

Dieter
 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:37 PM
Thomas Bächler
 
Default patches to initscripts

Am 07.12.2010 14:30, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:
>> The problem is: If blkid finds more than one valid signature, it will
>> not return anything, and we will mistakenly believe that there is no
>> file system (and happily overwrite the drive). This part of
>> initscripts is giving me a headache everytime I touch it.
>>
>
> what do the util-linux-ng maintainers say about that?
> Isn't this something that should be fixed in the blkid source code?

No, that won't be fixed - at least not the way you think.

Older blkid-like tools used to report the first matched signature. That
resulted in (for example) using an ext3 file system that also happened
to have a valid swap header as swapspace, destroying the ext3 file
system. (There are tons of other examples like this, in particular, old
versions of cryptsetup and mkswap didn't wipe old existing file system
headers.) It was decided that blkid will refuse to report any ambiguous
match as a match.

I'm thinking about requesting a feature that allows to report any match,
ambiguous or not.
 
Old 12-07-2010, 10:47 PM
Alexander Duscheleit
 
Default patches to initscripts

On Mon, 6 Dec 2010 11:39:06 +0100
Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org>
> wrote:
> > While looking through bugs for [core] packages, I notice that there
> > are a large number of bug report for these three packages. *In
> > total they account for ~13% of the bugs in the tracker!
>
> [...]
>
> > But given these are some of the uniqueness of Arch, I wonder what
> > we _as a group_ could to do to improve this situation? *Perhaps
> > organize a hack-a-thon on IRC one day? *Or we could advertise for
> > help, with the selection criterion being a git repo provided by the
> > applicant showing they can do stuff?
>
> As discussed with Allan, here are some patches to initscripts:
> <https://github.com/teg/initscripts-arch>.
>
> Comments very much welcome.

Do you think, you can have a look at https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/16625

It's a constant annoyance if you use something like qemu/kvm/etc and
have to wait ~20 seconds on every boot just for your dhcp-assigned
IP-Address.

Thanks,
Jinks
 
Old 12-07-2010, 10:54 PM
Thomas Bächler
 
Default patches to initscripts

Am 08.12.2010 00:47, schrieb Alexander Duscheleit:
> Do you think, you can have a look at https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/16625
>
> It's a constant annoyance if you use something like qemu/kvm/etc and
> have to wait ~20 seconds on every boot just for your dhcp-assigned
> IP-Address.
>
> Thanks,
> Jinks
>

Please oh please can that be implemented that in netcfg (basic bridging
is there, but no advanced options), so we can drop bridging support from
initscripts entirely?
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 11:42 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org