[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: with 2.4.1, should I use beta2 or beta3 lvm-tools?

On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 10:41:25AM +0100, H?kan Jettingstad wrote:
> When I try to apply the patch that LVM 0.9.1beta3 creates with: 
> ./configure --with-kernel_dir=/usr/src/linux-2.4.1 creates, on my
> /usr/src/linux-2.4.1 directory like this:
> hostname:/usr/src/linux-2.4.1# cat
> /usr/src/LVM/0.9.1_beta3/PATCHES/lvm-0.9.1_beta3-2.4.1.patch | patch -p1
> patching file include/linux/lvm.h
> patching file drivers/md/lvm.c
> patching file drivers/md/lvm-snap.c
> patching file drivers/md/Config.in
> Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected!  Assume -R? [n] 
> Apply anyway? [n] n
> I get the above error, should it apply cleanly or can I just ignore this and
> answer y to apply anyway?

The problem is that Linux 2.4.1 was not out when we released LVM 0.9.1
Beta3, so we don't have a fragments file for it.  If you create an empty
file in the PATCHES/ directory called 'fragments-2.4.1' and rerun configure
and make in the PATCHES directory, you should get a valid patch for 2.4.1

AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc.                  Voice:  612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111              Fax:    612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414                  E-Mail: lewis sistina com

Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B  52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
 (Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)

-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
File not found. Should I fake it? (Y/N)
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------

Attachment: pgp00009.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]