Comment 47 for bug 557429

> I also agree with Philip's assessment. When it hits, it is
> devastating, but it takes a very specific series of events to hit,
> and asking people to not upgrade as a result is too extreme.

I agree:

Re-attaching parts of an array that have been running degraded
separately and contain the same amount and conflicting
changes, results in the assembly of a corrupt array.

> Philip, you mentioned to me that 9.10 was also affected-- what about
> earlier releases?

It was probably present in the current form since the udev rules use
"mdadm --incremental". (9.04 if I remember correctly)