r279 - mdadm/trunk/debian

[madduck at users.alioth.debian.org]

Author: madduck
Date: 2006-11-17 20:18:43 +0100 (Fri, 17 Nov 2006)
New Revision: 279

Modified:
   mdadm/trunk/debian/FAQ
Log:
typo

Modified: mdadm/trunk/debian/FAQ
===================================================================
--- mdadm/trunk/debian/FAQ	2006-11-17 11:28:54 UTC (rev 278)
+++ mdadm/trunk/debian/FAQ	2006-11-17 19:18:43 UTC (rev 279)
@@ -118,7 +118,7 @@
   At the same time, however, RAID4/5/6 provide somewhat better redundancy in
   the event of two failing disks. In a RAID10 configuration, if one disk is
   already dead, the RAID can only survive if any of the two disks in the other
-  RAID1 array fails, but not if the second disk in the degraded RADI1 array
+  RAID1 array fails, but not if the second disk in the degraded RAID1 array
   fails (see next item, 4b). A RAID6 across four disks can cope with any two
   disks failing. However, RAID6 is noticeably slower than RAID5. RAID5 and
   RAID4 do not differ much, but can only handle single-disk failures.