Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 01:18:39 +0200 (EET) From: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> To: Andreas Braukmann <braukmann@tse-online.de> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Future of RAIDFrame and Vinum (was: Future of RAIDFrame) Message-ID: <20040112011539.S32387-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> In-Reply-To: <35520000.1073852978@cage.int.unixxinu.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, Andreas Braukmann wrote: > On 01/11/04 12:13:36 +0100 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > > In message <20040111120824.00cb6314@Magellan.Leidinger.net>, > > Alexander Leidinger writes: > > > >> fine, but if I got it right, do you (Greg) agree to remove it from > >> -current? > > > > My proposal is to do just that with both vinum and raidframe until > > one or possibly both are up to full strength again. > > and I'm pretty sure, that you'll provide means to migrate > the vinum volumes on -current systems transparently and > in-place to regular partitions? > > vinum (IMHO) is a quite valuable piece of software. I'm > using it quite intensively; *especially* on -current-boxes > I'm in need of most flexible storage management. > oh yes - and please fix disklabel to support an arbirtary number of file system per a "disk" or "slice" in the process, because otherwise it will not be converting many setups. > > -Andreas >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040112011539.S32387-100000>