[Bug 1074606] Re: gparted identifying incorrect raid arrays

[Steve Langasek]

This SRU has remained unverified after 259 days in the -proposed queue.
I've removed it now from quantal-proposed and am marking the task
'wontfix'.

** Changed in: gparted (Ubuntu Quantal)
       Status: Fix Committed => Won't Fix

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Foundations Bugs, which is subscribed to gparted in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1074606

Title:
  gparted identifying incorrect raid arrays

Status in Gnome Partition Editor:
  Fix Released
Status in “gparted” package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in “gparted” source package in Quantal:
  Won't Fix

Bug description:
  SRU Justification:

  Users get a popup reporting internal errors/bugs relating to oddly
  named raid arrays that do not exist.  There was a module that probed
  for mdadm devices by running mdadm --examine --scan to scan all disks
  for raid metadata.  This is incorrect and sometimes reports incorrect
  information so this module was removed upstream, and gparted now
  relies on /proc/partitions to detect active raid arrays.  There should
  be little to no chance of regression.

  Test Case: create an mdadm raid array, but do NOT add it to
  /etc/mdadm.conf.  After a reboot, mdadm will activate it as /dev/md127
  instead of /dev/md0 because it isn't registered in the conf file.
  Gparted thinks it should be /dev/md0 and errors because it doesn't
  exist.

  End SRU justification.

  On startup, gparted complains with several popups that it has an
  internal parted bug trying to stat /dev/md/XXXX.  This appears to be
  caused by its reliance on running mdadm --examine --scan to identify
  raid arrays.  Recent versions of mdadm now report the existence of
  "containers" that are not usable block devices, but gparted thinks
  they are.  It also reports the preferred major number rather than the
  actual.  In other words, if the metadata says it is supposed to be
  /dev/md0, that is what mdadm reports, however it may have been
  activated as /dev/md127 instead, causing gparted to try to use a
  device that does not exist.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gparted/+bug/1074606/+subscriptions