Bug#491977: grub-probe fails with "Cannot find a GRUB drive for /dev/dm-N."
Robert Millan
rmh at aybabtu.com
Mon Jul 28 21:12:40 UTC 2008
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 10:36:02PM +0200, Moritz Naumann wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Robert Millan wrote:
> > Please try:
> >
> > mdadm -D -b /dev/md0
> > mdadm -D /dev/md0
>
> > debby:~# mdadm -D -b /dev/md0
> > ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid1 num-devices=1 spares=1 UUID=b36bed37:7b1ca284:5f985e7d:0ec83b51
>
> > debby:~# mdadm -D /dev/md0
> > /dev/md0:
> > Version : 00.90.03
> > Creation Time : Thu Jun 16 19:10:19 2005
> > Raid Level : raid1
> > Array Size : 192640 (188.16 MiB 197.26 MB)
> > Used Dev Size : 192640 (188.16 MiB 197.26 MB)
> > Raid Devices : 1
> > Total Devices : 2
> > Preferred Minor : 0
> > Persistence : Superblock is persistent
> >
> > Update Time : Mon Jul 28 22:24:03 2008
> > State : clean
> > Active Devices : 1
> > Working Devices : 2
> > Failed Devices : 0
> > Spare Devices : 1
> >
> > UUID : b36bed37:7b1ca284:5f985e7d:0ec83b51
> > Events : 0.12672
> >
> > Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
> > 0 254 5 0 active sync /dev/dm-5
> >
> > 1 254 2 - spare /dev/dm-2
> > debby:~#
>
> I'm aware this is a silly configuration, 1 active device 1 spare with a
> total of two devices. So, while this configuration neither gives me
> redundancy nor speedy access it is still a perfectly legal configuration
> as per mdraid. I didn't think of wheter or not this could be the cause
> of the grub problems until now.
I think the usual thing to find in that output are physical devices instead
of /dev/dm-X.
What other special things are in your setup that we should know about? Are
you using LVM / EVMS or something like that?
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."
More information about the Pkg-grub-devel
mailing list