Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230

 

 

 

Sarge, lvm2, raid: startup/shutdown messages

If none of the specific sub-forums seem right for your thread, ask here.
Post Reply
Message
Author
five0
Posts: 5
Joined: 2006-08-27 00:28

Sarge, lvm2, raid: startup/shutdown messages

#1 Post by five0 »

I recently completed a Sarge installation on lvm2 on raid. While the system appears to be working fine after a reboot, i found the following error message slightly distracting:

Code: Select all

devfs_mk_dir: invalid argument.<4>devfs_mk_dev: could not append to parent for /disc

It appears a lot of times at boot, with no error message coming before or after it.

On my other systems (i.e., those not exhibiting this error,) shutdown usually produces something similar to:

Code: Select all

md0 switched to read-only mode
md1 swtiched to read-only mode
On my system, however, while I have only md0 and md1 built, shutdown would produce:

Code: Select all

md3409 switched to read-only mode
md25 switched to read-only mode
md2342 switched to read-only mode
md355 switched to read-only mode
md56 switched to read-only mode
md185 switched to read-only mode
<snipped much lengthier output>
The exact error message is different, and because I haven't found a log containing these messages, there could very well be a pattern in the numbers shown during successive shutdowns.

Again, the system functions fine, but I'd like to know if this is a bug worth submitting, or if it's a limitation of using devfs (I've used Etch and Sid in the past with udev, and I've never seen this before.)

I understand that it could be harmless, but I'd like to know why it's occuring, and if there are ways to prevent it from occuring.

Thanks.

pelle
Posts: 25
Joined: 2006-08-29 07:12
Location: Sweden

#2 Post by pelle »

It has to do with devfs, which is obsolete by now. So I wouldn't worry about it (although I can't say for sure).

Post Reply