[gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work
hi, i have external hard drive connected through usb. i put the following line into /etc/fstab /dev/sda1 /mnt/usb ext3 user,auto,exec 0 0 but localmount reports the problem of not finding /dev/sda1. when i tried to call mount -at .. after the boot proces in local.start it proceeds well. what is responsible for initializing of /dev/sda1? or have i forgotten to add something into fstab? thanks, pavel -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work
Pavel Sanda [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30/01/2008 12:40 Por favor, responda a gentoo-user Para: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org cc: Asunto: [gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work hi, i have external hard drive connected through usb. i put the following line into /etc/fstab /dev/sda1 /mnt/usb ext3 user,auto,exec 0 0 but localmount reports the problem of not finding /dev/sda1. when i tried to call mount -at .. after the boot proces in local.start it proceeds well. what is responsible for initializing of /dev/sda1? or have i forgotten to add something into fstab? thanks, pavel -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list Most probably fstab isn't be the problem, but loaded modules. The modules needed to handle USB connections must be loaded before you try to mount any USB disk, although I'm not sure whether this is possible and/or advisable. My suggestion is compiling this modules directly into the kernel, that way you make sure you have USB support from the very beginning. HTH, Abraham -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work
On 01/30/08 12:40, Pavel Sanda wrote: hi, i have external hard drive connected through usb. i put the following line into /etc/fstab /dev/sda1 /mnt/usb ext3 user,auto,exec 0 0 shouldn't that be: users instead of user Plug the exter. HD into USB and post the last several line of dmesg What does it say? -- #Joseph GPG KeyID: ED0E1FB7 -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work
Joseph pisze: On 01/30/08 12:40, Pavel Sanda wrote: hi, i have external hard drive connected through usb. i put the following line into /etc/fstab /dev/sda1 /mnt/usb ext3 user,auto,exec 0 0 shouldn't that be: users instead of user Plug the exter. HD into USB and post the last several line of dmesg What does it say? You should verify is Your instalation (grub or lilo) configured to boot from SD* device (if you run natively from bios that allows boot from usb drive) or You must compile in your kernel drivers to USB Storage. If You use GenKernel, that drivers are in INITRD! It cannot be loaded as module - must be compiled into kernel. If You have such configuration, try to check your filesystem and MBR (Master Boot Record) for read errors. Some USB devices also cannot boot from USB, but i think that is a problem of Pendrives only. PS: I have gentoo on external drive, that boot correctly from bios. Mateusz M. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work
On Wednesday 30 January 2008, Joseph wrote: On 01/30/08 12:40, Pavel Sanda wrote: hi, i have external hard drive connected through usb. i put the following line into /etc/fstab /dev/sda1 /mnt/usb ext3 user,auto,exec 0 0 shouldn't that be: users instead of user Maybe, maybe not, both are valid. user means that any non-root user can mount the device and the same user (or root) may umount it. users means that any non-root user can mount the device and any other user (or root) may umount it. Plug the exter. HD into USB and post the last several line of dmesg What does it say? It'll probably say that the device is /dev/sdb1 or some such. The real problem is likely what another poster mentioned - suitable drivers not loaded yet when init comes to use /etc/fstab. One could try listing these drivers in /etc/autoload.d/kernel-2.6 but the easiest is probably to compile them into the kernel -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work
Alan McKinnon pisze: On Wednesday 30 January 2008, Joseph wrote: On 01/30/08 12:40, Pavel Sanda wrote: hi, i have external hard drive connected through usb. i put the following line into /etc/fstab /dev/sda1 /mnt/usb ext3 user,auto,exec 0 0 shouldn't that be: users instead of user Maybe, maybe not, both are valid. user means that any non-root user can mount the device and the same user (or root) may umount it. users means that any non-root user can mount the device and any other user (or root) may umount it. Plug the exter. HD into USB and post the last several line of dmesg What does it say? It'll probably say that the device is /dev/sdb1 or some such. The real problem is likely what another poster mentioned - suitable drivers not loaded yet when init comes to use /etc/fstab. One could try listing these drivers in /etc/autoload.d/kernel-2.6 but the easiest is probably to compile them into the kernel You have right. Standard unix kernel was designed to have all inside. I don't know why some people still prefer modules than monolith kernel. If you have modules, you must recompile all of them when new ABI comes out. On monolithic kernel its all there. Also i don't know if modules are not slower than monolith Kernel because of User space to Kernel space connection. Compiled in modules makes kernel run faster, and if it's server, then even 0.1 sec makes the different on functions execution and internal core communication. Partly beyond of that problem is IPC module communication. But if there are benefits then also are problems with error code execution or beta drivers installed. Also if You have Molnar's Real Time Preemption Model on Your kernel, You should choose monolithic kernel. PS: some drivers are don't work as modules like they should. You see Windows - there are drivers like Linux modules - what it makes? Blue screens of death ;), but this is another story... ;) Mateusz M. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work
On Wednesday 30 January 2008, Mateusz Mierzwinski wrote: Alan McKinnon pisze: One could try listing these drivers in /etc/autoload.d/kernel-2.6 but the easiest is probably to compile them into the kernel You have right. Standard unix kernel was designed to have all inside. I don't know why some people still prefer modules than monolith kernel. If you have modules, you must recompile all of them when new ABI comes out. On monolithic kernel its all there. Also i don't know if modules are not slower than monolith Kernel because of User space to Kernel space connection. Compiled in modules makes kernel run faster, and if it's server, then even 0.1 sec makes the different on functions execution and internal core communication. Partly beyond of that problem is IPC module communication. But if there are benefits then also are problems with error code execution or beta drivers installed. Also if You have Molnar's Real Time Preemption Model on Your kernel, You should choose monolithic kernel. PS: some drivers are don't work as modules like they should. You see Windows - there are drivers like Linux modules - what it makes? Blue screens of death ;), but this is another story... ;) That's an easy answer :-) Standard Unix was designed for systems where you know exactly what hardware you have up front and there are no nasty surprises. Take for example an SGI box. How many PCI chipsets could it possibly have? Exactly one. So you know exactly which driver you will need. Apple are still lucky in this regard, as the only hardware that goes in them is Apple's hardware and kernel configurationis then quite easy. But we use the worst possible design that demented designers could ever come up with - PCs. The range of stuff available is staggering. The amount of dodgy hardware that claims to conform to spec but doesn't is even more staggering. So now exactly which modules are you going to compile in monolithically? What about hotpluggable hardware? As a vendor you have no way of knowing which funky hardware the user will ever plug into a notebook, and you simply cannot compile everything in (never mind the driver conflicts you will have). Gentoo expects their users to compile their own kernels so to a large extent we can make stuff monolithic, apart from the hot-pluggable devices. Binary distros cannot do this. To conserve memory they must load only the drivers for hardware that is actually present, and to do that one needs modules. I don;t know of a binary commercial distro that will gladly still support users who compile their own kernels - they usually stuff it all up gloriously. It's a no-brainer really. I don't buy the speedup argument either and have never seena benchmark that proves modules are slower. The Linux kernel module loader is essentially self-modifying code and inserts modules into kernel space as if they had been there monolithically (within reason of course). Some drivers do behave differently between being modular and monolithic, but this is a function of a crappy coder and not a function of modularity :-) If a piece of kernel code causes a BSOD, then it will probably do it either way it is loadable as the code is probably crappy. A Real Time kernel is not suitable for a PC either - I can't think of any RT application where a PC would be a *GOOD* choice. For that I would be using the embedded arches with a board where as designer I know exactly what is present and what isn't. Monolithic makes more sense in that case. I can imagine why Ingo made that choice - with RT he has to supply certain guarantees and probbaly can't do that with modules coming and going all the time. Basically. modern Linux is essentially unusable without kernel modules. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work
Alan McKinnon pisze: On Wednesday 30 January 2008, Mateusz Mierzwinski wrote: Alan McKinnon pisze: One could try listing these drivers in /etc/autoload.d/kernel-2.6 but the easiest is probably to compile them into the kernel You have right. Standard unix kernel was designed to have all inside. I don't know why some people still prefer modules than monolith kernel. If you have modules, you must recompile all of them when new ABI comes out. On monolithic kernel its all there. Also i don't know if modules are not slower than monolith Kernel because of User space to Kernel space connection. Compiled in modules makes kernel run faster, and if it's server, then even 0.1 sec makes the different on functions execution and internal core communication. Partly beyond of that problem is IPC module communication. But if there are benefits then also are problems with error code execution or beta drivers installed. Also if You have Molnar's Real Time Preemption Model on Your kernel, You should choose monolithic kernel. PS: some drivers are don't work as modules like they should. You see Windows - there are drivers like Linux modules - what it makes? Blue screens of death ;), but this is another story... ;) That's an easy answer :-) Standard Unix was designed for systems where you know exactly what hardware you have up front and there are no nasty surprises. Take for example an SGI box. How many PCI chipsets could it possibly have? Exactly one. So you know exactly which driver you will need. Apple are still lucky in this regard, as the only hardware that goes in them is Apple's hardware and kernel configurationis then quite easy. But we use the worst possible design that demented designers could ever come up with - PCs. The range of stuff available is staggering. The amount of dodgy hardware that claims to conform to spec but doesn't is even more staggering. So now exactly which modules are you going to compile in monolithically? What about hotpluggable hardware? As a vendor you have no way of knowing which funky hardware the user will ever plug into a notebook, and you simply cannot compile everything in (never mind the driver conflicts you will have). Gentoo expects their users to compile their own kernels so to a large extent we can make stuff monolithic, apart from the hot-pluggable devices. Binary distros cannot do this. To conserve memory they must load only the drivers for hardware that is actually present, and to do that one needs modules. I don;t know of a binary commercial distro that will gladly still support users who compile their own kernels - they usually stuff it all up gloriously. It's a no-brainer really. I don't buy the speedup argument either and have never seena benchmark that proves modules are slower. The Linux kernel module loader is essentially self-modifying code and inserts modules into kernel space as if they had been there monolithically (within reason of course). Some drivers do behave differently between being modular and monolithic, but this is a function of a crappy coder and not a function of modularity :-) If a piece of kernel code causes a BSOD, then it will probably do it either way it is loadable as the code is probably crappy. A Real Time kernel is not suitable for a PC either - I can't think of any RT application where a PC would be a *GOOD* choice. For that I would be using the embedded arches with a board where as designer I know exactly what is present and what isn't. Monolithic makes more sense in that case. I can imagine why Ingo made that choice - with RT he has to supply certain guarantees and probbaly can't do that with modules coming and going all the time. Basically. modern Linux is essentially unusable without kernel modules. Talking about modularize kernel i think this is an gentoo mailing list so every user know's his hardware - if not there is always GOOGLE, Gentoo HowTo and Hardware Manual. Most drivers in kernel are universal for one vendor family what makes more suitable to different types of chipsets (revisions A, B etc...). There is also true that maybee kernel modules are good for people with binary distro's but Gentoo is source based distribution - thank god - and every user should compile kernel for his hardware - modules not needed. Cheap code modules are also bad rule of cheap programmers, which don't know system and kernel structures. Afterwords thats how making usage of NDISWRAPPER is fundamental on Windows drivers hardware. If we speak about realtime preemption model i think that You are mistaken saying that PC and realtime kernels (software) is not good choice. My licentiate work on University of Silesia (Poland, Katowice) is about usage of realtime services in computer LAN/WAN networks. I digging some materials about RTOS and realtime preemption model, realtime schedule algorithm and realtime applications critical points programming. I don't know
Re: [gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work
On Thursday 31 January 2008, Mateusz Mierzwinski wrote: Talking about modularize kernel i think this is an gentoo mailing list so every user know's his hardware - if not there is always GOOGLE, Gentoo HowTo and Hardware Manual. Most drivers in kernel are universal for one vendor family what makes more suitable to different types of chipsets (revisions A, B etc...). There is also true that maybee kernel modules are good for people with binary distro's but Gentoo is source based distribution - thank god - and every user should compile kernel for his hardware - modules not needed. Rubbish. Let's say tomorrow I plug in a USB sound card, joystick and HSDPA modem. Today I do not have this hardware. Should I rebuild my kernel just to use a hotplug device that I borrowed for a few hours? No, thanks, I'm going to use modrobe. To get my sound card to work, I need a parameter dell=m42. How should I easily pass this argument without modules? Should I have a webcam driver permanently loaded in kernel space just for the odd case where I decide to use it? 1995 called, they say they want their hardware back. Cheap code modules are also bad rule of cheap programmers, which don't know system and kernel structures. Afterwords thats how making usage of NDISWRAPPER is fundamental on Windows drivers hardware. sigh If a crap programmer writes a module, it will be crap and do $BAD_STUFF. How does this change if the crap programmer is forced to not write modules? Does he suddenly get enlightened and know what KR have been telling him for years? CRAP PROGRAMMERS WRITE CRAP CODE. MODULES ARE COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT TO THIS. If we speak about realtime preemption model i think that You are mistaken saying that PC and realtime kernels (software) is not good choice. My licentiate work on University of Silesia (Poland, Katowice) is about usage of realtime services in computer LAN/WAN networks. I digging some materials about RTOS and realtime preemption model, realtime schedule algorithm and realtime applications critical points programming. I don't know if PC + Realtime preemption model is something wrong. When You need critical services for network such as multiplexed SDH traffic control and violation prevention You must have great power computer with RTOS, that can monitor min. 166MB/s traffic full duplex. Now-days computers have enough power to stand with RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computing) machines - thats why Sun Solaris has arrived on PC's. Another big step is RTLinux with dual core - realtime core and Linux kernel working together. That type of usage is not my area of expertise, but I can tell that it's a niche market. If monolithicality is the correct design paradigm there, then the designer has the option of building a monolithic kernel. If you can coerce it to work on Intel cpus, well that's fine and dandy and attests to the power and adaptibility of Linux. But how does this support your assertion that modules are a bad idea? You have the choice to do it a better way in those circumstances. Meanwhile, the vast majority of server nd desktop deployments out there that truly do need kernel modules (including Gentoo) cna and should continue to use them. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work
Alan McKinnon pisze: On Thursday 31 January 2008, Mateusz Mierzwinski wrote: Talking about modularize kernel i think this is an gentoo mailing list so every user know's his hardware - if not there is always GOOGLE, Gentoo HowTo and Hardware Manual. Most drivers in kernel are universal for one vendor family what makes more suitable to different types of chipsets (revisions A, B etc...). There is also true that maybee kernel modules are good for people with binary distro's but Gentoo is source based distribution - thank god - and every user should compile kernel for his hardware - modules not needed. Rubbish. Let's say tomorrow I plug in a USB sound card, joystick and HSDPA modem. Today I do not have this hardware. Should I rebuild my kernel just to use a hotplug device that I borrowed for a few hours? No, thanks, I'm going to use modrobe. To get my sound card to work, I need a parameter dell=m42. How should I easily pass this argument without modules? Should I have a webcam driver permanently loaded in kernel space just for the odd case where I decide to use it? 1995 called, they say they want their hardware back. Cheap code modules are also bad rule of cheap programmers, which don't know system and kernel structures. Afterwords thats how making usage of NDISWRAPPER is fundamental on Windows drivers hardware. sigh If a crap programmer writes a module, it will be crap and do $BAD_STUFF. How does this change if the crap programmer is forced to not write modules? Does he suddenly get enlightened and know what KR have been telling him for years? CRAP PROGRAMMERS WRITE CRAP CODE. MODULES ARE COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT TO THIS. If we speak about realtime preemption model i think that You are mistaken saying that PC and realtime kernels (software) is not good choice. My licentiate work on University of Silesia (Poland, Katowice) is about usage of realtime services in computer LAN/WAN networks. I digging some materials about RTOS and realtime preemption model, realtime schedule algorithm and realtime applications critical points programming. I don't know if PC + Realtime preemption model is something wrong. When You need critical services for network such as multiplexed SDH traffic control and violation prevention You must have great power computer with RTOS, that can monitor min. 166MB/s traffic full duplex. Now-days computers have enough power to stand with RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computing) machines - thats why Sun Solaris has arrived on PC's. Another big step is RTLinux with dual core - realtime core and Linux kernel working together. That type of usage is not my area of expertise, but I can tell that it's a niche market. If monolithicality is the correct design paradigm there, then the designer has the option of building a monolithic kernel. If you can coerce it to work on Intel cpus, well that's fine and dandy and attests to the power and adaptibility of Linux. But how does this support your assertion that modules are a bad idea? You have the choice to do it a better way in those circumstances. Meanwhile, the vast majority of server nd desktop deployments out there that truly do need kernel modules (including Gentoo) cna and should continue to use them. You have right with that borrowed hardware or even buy it. But if You have some like IDE controller on motherboard, why use all modules in kernel? Maybee to turn of DMA or something. Why Realtime without modules? I don't know how modules works under RTOS, if I don't know so better for the world is not touch it. maybe sometimes, but now servers only on monolitic kernel. Send me email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], we can talk privacy... ;) -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Mounting /dev/sdaX on boot does not work
On Thursday 31 January 2008, Alan McKinnon wrote: To get my sound card to work, I need a parameter dell=m42. How should I easily pass this argument without modules? IIRC, the syntax for passing arguments to built-in modules is modulename.paramname=value on the kernel command line. Of course, only at boot time (while with real modules you can pass the arguments when you load the module, and also you can load/unload the module many times without rebooting). I'm not entering the debate here; just wanted to share the info. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
