Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 07:34:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 07:34:57 -0400 Received: from vladimir.pegasys.ws ([64.220.160.58]:33043 "HELO vladimir.pegasys.ws") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 07:34:56 -0400 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 04:40:36 -0700 From: jw schultz To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Linux v2.5.42 Message-ID: <20021012114036.GB22536@pegasys.ws> Mail-Followup-To: jw schultz , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <20021012095026.GC28537@merlin.emma.line.org> <20021012111140.GA22536@pegasys.ws> <1034423197.14382.2.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1034423197.14382.2.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 962 Lines: 24 On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 12:46:37PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Sat, 2002-10-12 at 12:11, jw schultz wrote: > > So far everything indicates that LVM2 is not compatible with > > LVM. That LVM2 and LVM(1) can coexist-exist is irrelevant if > > 2.5 hasn't got a working LVM(1). And that would leave us > > with having to do backup+restore around the upgrade. > > LVM2 supports LVM1 volumes. I don't know where you got the idea > otherwise. Good. I'm very glad to be wrong. Then all we need care about is project maturity and design. -- ________________________________________________________________ J.W. Schultz Pegasystems Technologies email address: jw@pegasys.ws Remember Cernan and Schmitt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/