Bug#715324: mdadm: many files missing from upstream (docs, mdassemble and raid6check)

[NeilBrown]

On Mon, 08 Jul 2013 02:38:17 +0200 Christoph Anton Mitterer
<calestyo at scientia.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 2013-07-08 at 09:48 +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> > Maturity.
> Ah... I wasn't aware that upstream still actively discourages it's
> use :)

I don't discourage it's use, but I don't really want to encourage it yet
either.
There is certainly useful functionality, but it lacks polish.

> 
> 
> 
> btw,... when I have you in chat Neil... (and actually this might be
> interesting for the Debian maintainer, too)...
> 
> 1) Is there any interest int moving Debian's mdadm FAQ upstream?
> I've started with a patchset (not yet submitted, though) that improves
> some areas of the current versions...
> And I sent you a mail with some infos needed to better describe the
> RAID10 layouts... perhaps you've also seen already the two threads on
> linux-raid... some questions I've asked there are also of (IMHO) general
> interest (and not yet really answered).

Yes I've seen all that but not looked very closely.  I hope to respond where
appropriate later today - or tomorrow.

> 
> So given that most of these questions are not Debian specific... it may
> help in moving the FAQ upstream.

I don't object to carrying a FAQ in the mdadm package.  It might even be
quite useful.

> 
> 2) Can it be that the ANNOUNCE-file for 3.2.6 is missing in git? (it's
> in the tarball on kernel.org)

3.2.6 is in a side-branch - "mdadm-3.2.x".  The announce file is in there.
Maybe I should pull it into the main branch... not sure it is worth it though.


> 
> 
> 
> Oh and one more thing (but this goes probably again more to the Debian
> maintainer):
> I've noted that Debian's udev rules has several (minor?) differences to
> those from upstream... some of them are commented to be intentional,
> some not.
> The same is the case with Debian's lvm2 package,... where the changes
> cause several problems and are really a pain in the ar**... so perhaps
> it's worth that someone (with more insight than me ;) ) checks this :)

Getting udev rules right is a bit of pain.
I think of the ones I package with mdadm as more of a suggestion than a
requirement.  I'm open to fixes, and to distro-specific rules files, if
anyone wants to send me some.


NeilBrown
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 828 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-mdadm-devel/attachments/20130708/177aba04/attachment.sig>