Devin Reade wrote on Thu, 16 Apr 2009 21:19:54 -0600:
The symptoms you describe could be a side effect of being previously hit by
http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2914 and
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447841.
Thanks for the belated info, anyway. But this doesn't seem to apply
[I saw this thread in the mailing list archives, but wasn't subscribed
at the time, so sorry it's not a proper follow-up.]
The symptoms you describe could be a side effect of being previously hit by
http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2914 and
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447841.
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 01:43 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Barry Brimer wrote on Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:30:44 -0500:
According to /sbin/new-kernel-pkg .. the file that actually gets updated on
x86
and x86_64 systems is /boot/grub/grub.conf
And as I already mentioned in my first posting this
William L. Maltby wrote on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 06:01:43 -0400:
Hmmm... Maybe the *64 systems are different?
No, they are the same in this respect. I'm not seeing any difference.
There is a difference between systems (no matter which arch) when the
/etc/grub.conf symlink got created.
On all my
William L. Maltby wrote on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 05:39:27 -0400:
The installonlypkgs and installonly_limit keywords. The first, according
to man yum.conf, defaults to kernel, kernel-smp, kernel-bigmem,
kernel-enterprise, kernel-debug, kernel-unsupported and the latter to 3.
It seems to default to
on 4-7-2009 2:16 PM Robert spake the following:
William L. Maltby wrote:
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 21:31 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Barry Brimer wrote on Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:29:31 -0500:
/etc/grub.conf should be a symlink to /boot/grub/grub.conf. If for some
reason
it is not,
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 18:35 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Just updated another machine to 5.3, everything fine, but grub.conf wasn't
updated to the 128 kernel. It got a new modified date and the kernel is
there, but the content wasn't changed. /etc/sysconfig/kernel contains the
correct
Quoting JohnS jse...@gmail.com:
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 18:35 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Just updated another machine to 5.3, everything fine, but grub.conf wasn't
updated to the 128 kernel. It got a new modified date and the kernel is
there, but the content wasn't changed.
, JohnS jse...@gmail.com wrote:
From: JohnS jse...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [CentOS] kernel update doesn't update grub.conf
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2009, 11:17 AM
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 18:35 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Just updated another machine
Barry Brimer wrote on Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:29:31 -0500:
/etc/grub.conf should be a symlink to /boot/grub/grub.conf. If for some
reason
it is not, correct it, or look directly in /boot/grub/grub.conf and see if the
kernel was added there.
Sorry, I was talking about /boot/grub/grub.conf. I
Lincohn john wrote on Tue, 7 Apr 2009 08:49:17 -0700 (PDT):
Well, you can always manually
edit the grub.conf file, right?
sure, but it should work automatically. And did on all the other upgrades.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services:
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 21:31 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Barry Brimer wrote on Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:29:31 -0500:
/etc/grub.conf should be a symlink to /boot/grub/grub.conf. If for some
reason
it is not, correct it, or look directly in /boot/grub/grub.conf and see if
the
kernel was
William L. Maltby wrote:
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 21:31 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Barry Brimer wrote on Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:29:31 -0500:
/etc/grub.conf should be a symlink to /boot/grub/grub.conf. If for some
reason
it is not, correct it, or look directly in /boot/grub/grub.conf
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 16:16 -0500, Robert wrote:
William L. Maltby wrote:
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 21:31 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
snip
Well, JIC, make sure yoyr /boot/grub entries look like this.
ls -l /boot/grub/[gm]*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root8 May 9 2008
snip
Since *lots* of other folks have also upgraded w/NP, one makes a first
assumption that something must be slightly different on your node.
s/your/Kai's/ #?
snip
--
Bill
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
Quoting Robert kerp...@sbcglobal.net:
William L. Maltby wrote:
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 21:31 +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Barry Brimer wrote on Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:29:31 -0500:
/etc/grub.conf should be a symlink to /boot/grub/grub.conf. If for some
reason
it is not, correct it, or
Barry Brimer wrote on Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:30:44 -0500:
According to /sbin/new-kernel-pkg .. the file that actually gets updated on
x86
and x86_64 systems is /boot/grub/grub.conf
And as I already mentioned in my first posting this file *got* touched. The
last
modified date got changed, but
William L. Maltby wrote on Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:52:04 -0400:
AFAIK, my 5.3 is completely box stock in this area, and probably 98%
of others too. I have no /etc/grub*.
$ ls -l /etc/grub*
ls: /etc/grub*: No such file or directory
I also checked my 4.6 Centos. It has the
18 matches
Mail list logo
