Bug 185526 - Provide a meaningful vgck implementation
Summary: Provide a meaningful vgck implementation
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
Classification: Red Hat
Component: lvm2
Version: 5.7
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: Petr Rockai
QA Contact: Corey Marthaler
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 248191 576686 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks: 182355
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-03-15 15:19 UTC by Alasdair Kergon
Modified: 2012-10-10 20:11 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-10-10 20:11:46 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Alasdair Kergon 2006-03-15 15:19:27 UTC 
(ref. bug 168723)
Comment 1 Dave Wysochanski 2007-03-12 17:10:03 UTC 
Since no one has claimed this one, and I have been looking at recovery of
metadata and the code paths are similar, I'll take this for now.
Comment 2 Dave Wysochanski 2010-05-17 12:15:24 UTC 
Moving to rhel5.
Comment 3 Milan Broz 2010-06-23 15:34:04 UTC 
*** Bug 576686 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 4 Milan Broz 2010-06-23 15:34:29 UTC 
*** Bug 248191 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 Zdenek Kabelac 2010-11-24 22:11:04 UTC 
Looks to my like Petr's domain for now.
Comment 6 Petr Rockai 2010-11-30 23:00:32 UTC 
It may be my domain, but it would be useful to know what is vgck supposed to do. It does what the manpage says it does, but I agree it's not entirely useful since all other vg-related commands run the same checks anyway. So what is the meaning of this bug?

I can see 3 possible coures of action:
1) Get a clear picture of what vgck should do, retitle and repurpose this bug to that end.
2) Decide that vgck is redundant and remove it (although it's not *entirely* redundant anymore, I think it "fails" (gives error code) in more cases than vgs).
3) Do nothing and close this BZ as NOTABUG.

I am setting this to needinfo for now, in the hope of going with option 1 (as I don't have any ideas myself). If no-one comes up with anything, I'll fall back to option 3.
Comment 9 RHEL Program Management 2012-10-10 11:49:35 UTC 
Thank you for submitting this issue for consideration. Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 has reached the end of Production 1 Phase of its Life Cycle.  Red Hat does not plan to incorporate the suggested capability in a future Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 minor release. If you would like Red  Hat to re-consider this feature request and the requested functionality is not currently in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6, please re-open the request via appropriate support channels and provide additional supporting details about the importance of this issue.
Comment 10 Petr Rockai 2012-10-10 20:11:46 UTC 
Since 1) failed, going with 3).
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.