Re: [Evms-devel] newbie question - cannot mount snapshot volume

[Kevin C. <kev...@us...>]

Hi,

To make things much easier for you, try reading through the new install 
instructions that I've been working on at:
http://evms.sf.net/install/

These new instructions reflect the latest kernel versions and latest 
device-mapper versions, and you shouldn't have any problems with patch 
rejects.

-Kevin

On Tuesday 23 September 2003 11:14, Chia Chao wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> Thanks very much for the pointers. Indeed I did not follow section 2.B.5
> --- I was using device-mapper-1.00.05 instead of device-mapper-1.00.02
> referenced in the INSTALL file, so I mistakenly assumed that the extra
> package 2.4.21-dm-3.tar.bz2 is not needed.
>
> So I went to http://people.sistina.com/~thornber/patches/2.4-stable/2.4.21
> directory and noticed that there is a newer version 2.4.21-dm-4.tar.bz2 so
> I downloaded that version. This version has 4 more patches but I ignored
> them since they are not mentioned in the INSTALL file (00012 - 00015).
>
> However, when I tried to follow the INSTALL file to apply the reelvant
> patches, most of them encountered problems:
>
> 00002, 00003, 00004, 00009, 00010:
> Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected! [I chose default to ignore
> them]
>
> 00011:
> patching file driver/md/Config.in
> Hunk #1 failed at 14
>
> 00005:
> patching file driver/md/dm-snapshot.c
> Reversed (or previously applied) patch detcted! Assume -R? [n][hit return]
> Apply anyway? [n] [hit return]
> Skipping patch.
> 2 out of 2 hunks ignored -- saving rejects to file
> drivers/md/dm-snapshot.c.rej
> patching file driver/md/lvm.c
> Reversed (or previously applied) patch detcted! Assume -R? [n][hit return]
> Apply anyway? [n] [hit return]
> Skipping patch.
> 3 out of 3 hunks ignored -- saving rejects to file drivers/md/lvm.c.rej
> patching file fs/buffer.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 395 with fuzz 1 (offset 32 lines).
> patching file fs/reiserfs/super.c
> Reversed (or previously applied) patch detcted! Assume -R? [n][hit return]
> Apply anyway? [n] [hit return]
> Skipping patch.
> 1 out of 1 hunk ignored -- saving rejects to file fs/reiserfs/super.c.rej
> patching file fs/super.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 45 with fuzz 1 (offset 7 lines)
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 499 with fuzz 1 (offset 20 lines)
> Hunk #3 succeeded at 545 with fuzz 1 (offset 40 lines)
> patching file include/linux/fs.h
> Reversed (or previously applied) patch detcted! Assume -R? [n][hit return]
> Apply anyway? [n] [hit return]
> Skipping patch.
> 2 out of 2 hunks ignored -- saving rejects to file include/linux/fs.h.rej
> patching file kernel/ksyms.c
> Reversed (or previously applied) patch detcted! Assume -R? [n][hit return]
> Apply anyway? [n] [hit return]
> Skipping patch.
> 1 out of 1 hunk ignored -- saving frejects to file kernel/ksyms.c.rej
>
> 00006:
> patching file drivers/md/dm-snapshot.c
> Reversed (or previously applied) patch detcted! Assume -R? [n][hit return]
> Apply anyway? [n] [hit return]
> Skipping patch.
> 1 out of 1 hunk ignored -- saving rejects to file
> drivers/md/dm-snapshot.c.rej
>
> 00007:
> patching file drivers/md/dm-snapshot.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 580 (offset 56 lines).
> patching file drivers/md/dm.c
>
> I wonder maybe these patching problems are related to the fact that I used
> a different base device-mapper package? Should I also apply any of the
> newer patches (00012 - 00015)?
>
> Thanks
>
> Chia

-- 
Kevin Corry
kev...@us...
http://evms.sourceforge.net/