Re: recover partition table
Hello, Stephen Powell wrote: On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 13:42:15 -0400 (EDT), Geronimo wrote: I don't want to offend you, but all that you wrote I already found from google and friends. ... But I can make some educated guesses. For example, here's an excerpt from my /var/log/installer/partman file: ... The first number after OUT is probably the partition number. As in my partman log there where millions of OUT - lines, I focussed to the lines that look quit similar to fdisk output, like: == snip === Model: ATA INTEL SSDSA2M040 Path: /dev/sdd Sector size: 512 Sectors: 78165360 Sectors/track: 63 Heads: 255 Cylinders: 4865 Partition table: yes Type: msdos Partitions: # id length typefs pathname (0,0,0) (0,0,62)-1 0-32255 32256 primary label /dev/sdd-1 (0,1,0) (2611,254,62) 1 32256-21484431359 21484399104 primary ext4 /dev/sdd1 (2612,0,0) (2612,27,38)-1 21484431360-21485322239 890880 pri/log free/dev/sdd-1 (2612,27,39)(2660,173,8)2 21485322240-21884829695 399507456 primary ext3/dev/sdd2 (2660,173,9)(4865,122,56) 3 21884829696-40019951615 18135121920 primary ext4/dev/sdd3 (4865,122,57) (4865,144,62) -1 40019951616-40020664319 712704 pri/log free/dev/sdd-1 == snap === ... and these lines confused me, as wiki said, that biggest value from chs is 1023 - and for me the values in round brakets looked like chs values. As I'm no hero in juggling hex numbers by mind, I wrote a little helper, that dumped the mbr infos. Trying then your advice with parted -I I got values similar to the output of my dumper, but not matching the values from partman, so I came to the same conclusion as you - where I had to look at the man pages of parted to find a smaller unit than sectors. So I added little math to my dumping tool and finally the values matched. From manual I already read about the rescue option and as you recommended the same, I gave it a try. ... but I got an error, about missing or wrong label. - Huh? Did not used any label yet. So I added writing capabilities to my dumper and created a mbr, where I thought, should match. Then I wrote it to the drives mbr using dd and rebooted ... Voila - drive is recognized and all works well. Thank you very much for your patience and assistance. kind regards Gero P.S. on writing my dumper and checking all drives against partman log, may be I found a little bug from partman (don't know, whether it has any relevance): According to wiki, head and cylinder are 0-based, whereas sector is 1- based. So I think, a value of (0, 1, 0) as above is invalid and should not occure. I happen to notice 0-based sectors on every drive. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103271453.52148.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Vi, 25 mar 11, 14:52:53, Geronimo wrote: Tom H wrote: On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Geronimo geronimo...@arcor.de wrote: LOL - beside that, I don't have an mta configured to access internet and don't like to do so. So I'll communicate using email (kmail) or iceweasel - no more. You don't need an mta. I already filed that bugreport using email only. JFYI and for the archives: when you run 'reportbug --configure' don't select an MTA. Reportbug will submit the bug directly then. Hm - I have to confess, that my objection is not related to MTA, but to hidden/obscure transmission. Yes, I am paranoid ;) email interface is fine for me and I'll learn to use the right format. Thanks for your assistance! The template from http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting is missing the entry Severity, so my bugreport is not as desired. May be a list admin can change that? Anyone can do it, just send an e-mail to cont...@bugs.debian.org with this content (indented for readability): severity bugnumber wishlist thanks Great. Thanks for the pointer. This way I noticed, that my bugreport has already been moved to different package. You're so fast :) kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103261029.53906.geronimo...@arcor.de
recover partition table
Hello, recently I wiped out all but one partition tables by stupidness and hasty reading ... Thanks to testdisk, most of the damage is already fixed. There are 2 drives, that testdisk could not find the partion informations for. Accidently I discovered /var/log/installer/partman, which looks like being from the time before my dumb Chuck-Norris-Roundhouse-Kick ;) That logfile looks like having reasonable partition informations of all drives. Can anybody please shine me a light, how to patch the partition tables with informations from that file, so it might be possible to gain access to data ... kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103261137.44240.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: recover partition table
Hello, thank your for your assistance. Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: Am Samstag, 26. März 2011 schrieb Geronimo: Can anybody please shine me a light, how to patch the partition tables with informations from that file, so it might be possible to gain access to data ... maybe you can fix it, when you use fdisk, Not sure about fdisk. Does fdisk write partition table entry only? ... or does it have side effects on existing data - like wiping out superblock of existing fs, so you have to format the partition? I don't want to increase the damage, therefore I ask before doing anything. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103261459.20598.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: recover partition table
Hello, thank you all for your attention and assistance. Stephen Powell wrote: On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 06:37:44 -0400 (EDT), Geronimo wrote: That logfile looks like having reasonable partition informations of all drives. Can anybody please shine me a light, how to patch the partition tables with informations from that file, so it might be possible to gain access to data ... I looked at my /var/log/installer/partman file, and it does indeed look as though the exact sector information for the partitions is there. I'm a bit confused. I tried to read partition info from hex-dump of first block and compare that with the values from /var/log/installer/partman ... According to partition info from wiki the biggest number of chs is 0x3FF, which is 1023 decimal - and partman output contains entries like: (91201,0,0) (91201,80,62) So is there another way to interpret entries from partition table? kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103261736.08186.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: recover partition table
Hello, Stephen Powell wrote: On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 12:36:08 -0400 (EDT), Geronimo wrote: I'm a bit confused. I tried to read partition info from hex-dump of first block and compare that with the values from /var/log/installer/partman ... According to partition info from wiki the biggest number of chs is 0x3FF, which is 1023 decimal - and partman output contains entries like: (91201,0,0) (91201,80,62) So is there another way to interpret entries from partition table? The master boot record is the first sector of the disk (512 bytes). ... is further down in the file than the CHS information. I don't want to offend you, but all that you wrote I already found from google and friends. What I did not find is some info about partman logging. Searching debian MLs for partman has millions of hits, so its the same like no hits - can't read all that. As partman is internal to d-i, where can I find some info about the numbers shown around partition informations? You wrote, that disc addressing could be converted, if size is smaller than 8 Gig - none of my partitions fits this condition, so how can I calculate a sector from informations of partman log? kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103261842.15804.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Mark wrote: So when it's all said and done, it sounds like the safest bet is to edit the file that says in all caps DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE. Once a wise guy said: good software makes complex things look easy - judging grub2 based on this only, grub2 is worse than grub1 kind regards Gero P.S. May be someone likes to introduce a user-friendly name mapping, where a user can create a file like: hd1, 2 - my name is sue hd2, 3 - I'm the preffered one :) hdx, y - last not least, I'm here too which is evaluated by update-grub. Extraordinary would be support for placeholders like kernel-version or screen resolution, ... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103250706.48137.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, I did the tests, you asked me for. This time I'll attach some pictures, as pictures say more than thousand words ... Rebooting from debian after a grub-install/update-grub, situation is shown by picture grub01.png This time I waited more than 10 minutes, so it might be stated, that grub isn't busy, but crashed. Jochen Schulz wrote: Can you still make the system bootable again just by removing the extra SATA controller? No. after removing controller, grub shows less than with controller (picture grub02.png). Does it suffice to remove the disks from that controller? There's no difference, removing just the cables from the controller or removing the controller completely (grub02.png). Remember: there's no system drive attached to the external controller and in between I wiped out every MBR except the one from the drive, that should be booted from. Is there anything else you can do with the hardware or the BIOS to make it bootable again? I don't know what. BIOS boot order is checked, order of bootable harddisks from BIOS is checked too, the drive, that should be booted from is attached to the first Mainboard SATA-port ... So I have no idea, what to change from HW. Ok, that's great! I would say that makes you eligible to file a bug report against d-i. :) Can you diff the grub.cfg against the one generated by 6.0? How should I do that? It should be possible to use CD/DVD1 of the 6.0.0 installer and prevent upgrades from being installed. The easiest way is probably to unplug the network cable during installation. Seems like 6.0.0 disk images have been removed from mirrors too. As I normally use netinst-CDs only, I can't do that tests. Sorry. kind regards Gero attachment: grub01.pngattachment: grub02.png
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Jochen Schulz wrote: Geronimo: Jochen Schulz wrote: AFAICS, we can rule out the kernel as the cuplrit completely, as grub doesn't even get that far. Today appointments have been cancelled, so I can dedicate myself to grub issues. The fact, that the output of grub changes by removing the external controller causes me some headache ... Does this habbit imply, that BIOS activates the wrong drive? ... but if so, how can grub from ubuntu boot successfully Or does the different output means, that grub jumps from one mbr to the mbr of another drive? From a closer look to dpkg.log - there has been updates of python and grub uses python. Could this lead the different behaviour? I skimmed the sources of grub and from what I saw, grub does not use libraries or kernel stuff, but has reinvented every wheel. I don't know enuf of assembler to get rid of what's really going on ... So I have some more questions: 1.) Is there any tool to verify the generated boot.img or tell, what that boot.img tries to do? 2.) would it be possible to create several mbr-images that behave different, like beep at different frequency or write a little message to screen, ... ... just to verify, which mbr is activated from BIOS 3.) If the pictures from my other post lead to the fact, that BIOS activated the right grub image, but that crashed, is there a way to get rid of what grub is doing/trying - means, is there a verbose switch or some kind of logging to enable? kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103250949.38065.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Jochen Schulz wrote: Geronimo: From a closer look to dpkg.log - there has been updates of python and grub uses python. Could this lead the different behaviour? Looking at your dpkg.log again, I notice that grub-pc has been purged and replaced by grub-legacy. Which version of grub are we talking about again? :) As installation of grub-legacy resulted in an error - I purged that too and reinstalled grub2, to continue testing. - so I don't and didn't loose a word about grub-legacy. My boot drive currently has 3 primary partitions: 1. Debian stable (my root fs) 2. /boot for debian stable 3. Ubuntu 10.10 calling grub-install from debian stable results in an unbootable machine, calling grub-install from ubuntu results in a stable system, where I can boot both ubuntu and debian. regarding to tests 6.0 - download of dvd-1 completed, disk is beeing burned. tbc ;) kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103251200.24103.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Jochen Schulz wrote: a hint that this *might* actually be a graphics problem. See this bug report: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=594967 It looks like the fix didn't make into stable, but you can try setting GRUB_TERMINAL=console. You ARE my hero :D Unbelievable! GREAT! uncommenting GRUB_TERMINAL from /etc/default/grub works. After uncommenting I executed grub-install followed by update-grub and it works without having to patch /boot/grub/grub.cfg Now the remaining question is: wtf changed grafics settings for last update, as I did not changed HW for about half a year. Great, great - I can live very well without grub grafics, so no problem at all. So I skip installation of debian 6.0 kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103251257.06258.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Michelle Konzack wrote: Geronimo wrote: There's no choice to use another boot-manager. You have to use grub (which silently is grub2) or you have to use grub2. If grub2 is really stil beta - what the hell does it do in debian stable? This is not right, because you can choose LILO. AFAIK you don't have this choice from installer, only after installation - and if first reboot after installer fails, you don't have any choice! kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103251259.31012.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Michelle Konzack wrote: Hello Geronimo, Am 2011-03-23 09:58:54, hacktest Du folgendes herunter: I agree. How about a wishlist bug against debian-installer? Ok, when I found out, how to do that, I'll do it. reportbug debian-installer Thanks a lot for that hint. but see what happens: $ reportbug /usr/lib/pymodules/python2.6/reportbug/ui/gtk2_ui.py:476: PangoWarning: pango_layout_set_width: assertion `layout != NULL' failed gtk.main () /usr/lib/pymodules/python2.6/reportbug/ui/gtk2_ui.py:476: PangoWarning: pango_layout_get_extents: assertion `layout != NULL' failed gtk.main () /usr/lib/pymodules/python2.6/reportbug/ui/gtk2_ui.py:476: PangoWarning: pango_layout_get_line_count: assertion `layout != NULL' failed gtk.main () Gleitkomma-Ausnahme LOL - beside that, I don't have an mta configured to access internet and don't like to do so. So I'll communicate using email (kmail) or iceweasel - no more. May be, I find a webinterface to use. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103251350.43721.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: Bug in grub-pc results in unbootable system after installation (was: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?)
Hello, Jochen Schulz wrote: Thanks for your persistence, I already feared you might give up on that one. I love debian and for me there's no alternative, so I can't give up! BTW, I was wrong about the fix not being part of squeeze: the link above says the fix should be included in 1.98+20100804-12. But there's another user (message #154) that says the issue isn't fixed yet. As Tom and you stated, that the update from 6.0 to 6.0.1 did not change grub, So the question is not, whether that bug is fixed or not. The most *important* question is, *which* change caused grub to break - as grub worked fine (beside having to patch grub.cfg for hdx) before the 6.0.1 update. You can simply send en email to 594967 at bugs.debian.org and try to get Colin Watson's attention. Should I? - I don't have any information, that's not already part of the bug report. Sorry for not having googled by myself, but sometimes you don't have the right idea/search-token ... kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103251440.53813.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Tom H wrote: On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:56 AM, Geronimo geronimo...@arcor.de wrote: Tom H wrote: - Does grub-probe on squeeze and maverick return the same values? Looks like this is true. See attachments. Yes. Although the after some reboots result of having hd4 correspond to sda is strange. LOL - that's my every day business :) Changing device names caused by switching a drive from backplane on sounds reasonable to me. But I don't understand changing of drive naming without changing active drives. May be we should've also used search --no-floppy --fs-uuid --set 59c82698-6fcc-4512-a51c-261348d637da rather than set root='(hd2,msdos2)' just to be sure to be using the correct partition. Sorry, but I don't understand that much, that I know, where to put your changes, so please tell me the entire section and I'll perform that test. Sorry. No reason for sorry! - Tell my what I should test and I'll do that test. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103251449.36895.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Tom H wrote: On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Geronimo geronimo...@arcor.de wrote: LOL - beside that, I don't have an mta configured to access internet and don't like to do so. So I'll communicate using email (kmail) or iceweasel - no more. You don't need an mta. I already filed that bugreport using email only. The template from http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting is missing the entry Severity, so my bugreport is not as desired. May be a list admin can change that? kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103251452.53542.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Tom H wrote: It looks like you've found a gem, especially given the external card and this post by Colin Watson (#54): One effect of these changes was to load the video_cirrus and video_bochs modules by default (you can test whether this is the culprit by commenting them out in grub.cfg). I've seen a handful of systems that hang while trying to enumerate the PCI bus in GRUB; it so happens that those are the only modules that usually trigger GRUB's PCI bus enumeration in normal circumstances ... You can also verify this at a lower level by trying 'lspci' at a GRUB prompt. If it's the same problem, this will hang. Just tried to execute 'lspci' from GRUB prompt. Worked fine - no freeze. ... so may be it is another cause, but the same symptom ... kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103251504.06552.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: [SOLVED] Re: How to change the style and background of the Squeeze login screen?
Hello, Tom H wrote: On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Rick Thomas rbtho...@pobox.com wrote: Clearly I was wrong and we've returned to the days of editing configuration files by hand as the preferred mode of system administration. Such is life! PS: I understand the argument that the GNOME upstream folks have moved on and do not support gdm anymore. I further understand the argument that Debian can't go-it alone without upstream support. But I don't have to like the result! LOL to the last comment - and I agree. GNOME's fallen into a habit of setting certain defaults and only providing a CLI method of changing them. IIRC, one of the arguments for this design decision is that having too many different settings confuses users. normal conclusion of the desire not to confuse the user would be the introduction of an expert switch. ... but gnome developers had decided to be simple, not user friendly, with the result that people like me, that don't like kde and don't want to support change of development direction end up using kde, cause simple gnome is not usable any more. Some decisions really make sense ;) ubuntu will leave gnome, others will follow, so soon nobody can remember about gnome ;) kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103251528.55972.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Jochen Schulz wrote: ACK, it's probably another issue. But you may still want to refer to this bug number in your new report. Done. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103251644.09051.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Jochen Schulz wrote: Geronimo: As every of my drives had an installed grub in mbr, Ok, I forgot that. (BTW, I find this setup really strange, but if it worked in the past with grub2 it should of course continue to work.) LOL - let me clarify, that this setup has not been created by intention. I tried to change root to another SSD, but I never installed grub to the other 6 drives. It happened by accident, when grub-install /dev/sda was executed, but /dev/sda is not the expected drive, but mapped by who ever to another drive, that should be /dev/sdg or so. What's unclear from (my post from 06:59:49 today): 1.) A fresh installation from debian 6.0 netinst CD results in an unbootable system, even using a single partition installation target. Ok, that's great! I would say that makes you eligible to file a bug report against d-i. :) Can you diff the grub.cfg against the one generated by 6.0? How should I do that? If stable repos are updated to 6.0.1 then installing a fresh system using 6.0 netinst CD will end up by a fresh installed 6.0.1 system. I don't have the possibility to diff agains 6.0 - the 6.0 systems I continue to have, are quite different HW and for so not comparable. So since update to 6.0.1 every installation on my desktop system results in an unusable/broken system. Can you still make the system bootable again just by removing the extra SATA controller? Does it suffice to remove the disks from that controller? Is there anything else you can do with the hardware or the BIOS to make it bootable again? I'll check that, on my next sparetime timeslot. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103240851.04041.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Tom H wrote: Thanks for the diff but it made me go cros-eyed. :) Same happened to me :) Take a look at them below. Your squeeze grub.cfg sets root as sdg2 then sde2 through 00_linux, as sdg2 through 05_debian_theme, and sde2 through 10_linux. I don't have 05_debian_theme on my boxes (deleted!) but looking quickly at 10_linux, the first set root... comes from a grub-probe of the directory corresponding to $GRUB_THEME. I don't need debian_theme, guess it came from christmas addons. I don't care about the look of grub - I just want to bring up the system to start work. To complete confusion, I guess, that debian_theme tries to get some files from /usr/share/... so if /usr is another drive (like in my case), it has to have a different root. Here again the (hdX, msdosY) will point to anything, but the right partition. Currently I'm busy with backup/restore, so can't reboot system. May be today evening, or tomorrow ... kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103240900.01412.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello,
Tom H wrote:
- Does grub-probe on squeeze and maverick return the same values?
Looks like this is true. See attachments.
- Can you chainload squeeze's grub from maverick's?
From maverick the boot drive after update-grub is now hd2
output from chainload:
booting a command list
error: no such partition
Press any key to continue
When I edit the chainload-entry and change hd2 to i.e. hd1, the output is as
follows:
booting a command list
error: hd1,msdos2 cannot get C/H/S values
Press any key to continue
From the ubuntus grub.cfg both ubuntu and debian are bootable.
kind regards
Gero
### PROBE OF / ###
ext2
7ce6540f-5ffe-445d-9bbf-d41652854700
/dev/sde1
(hd4,msdos1)
### PROBE OF /boot ###
ext2
59c82698-6fcc-4512-a51c-261348d637da
/dev/sde2
(hd4,msdos2)
### PROBE OF /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part1
###
ext2
7ce6540f-5ffe-445d-9bbf-d41652854700
/dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part1
(hd4,msdos1)
### PROBE OF /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part2
###
ext2
59c82698-6fcc-4512-a51c-261348d637da
/dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part2
(hd4,msdos2)
===
--- after some reboots
===
### PROBE OF / ###
ext2
7ce6540f-5ffe-445d-9bbf-d41652854700
/dev/sda1
(hd4,msdos1)
### PROBE OF /boot ###
ext2
59c82698-6fcc-4512-a51c-261348d637da
/dev/sda2
(hd4,msdos2)
### PROBE OF /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part1
###
ext2
7ce6540f-5ffe-445d-9bbf-d41652854700
/dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part1
(hd4,msdos1)
### PROBE OF /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part2
###
ext2
59c82698-6fcc-4512-a51c-261348d637da
/dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part2
(hd4,msdos2)
### PROBE OF /mnt/squeeze ###
ext2
7ce6540f-5ffe-445d-9bbf-d41652854700
/dev/sdc1
(hd2,msdos1)
### PROBE OF /mnt/squeeze/boot ###
ext2
59c82698-6fcc-4512-a51c-261348d637da
/dev/sdc2
(hd2,msdos2)
### PROBE OF /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part1
###
ext2
7ce6540f-5ffe-445d-9bbf-d41652854700
/dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part1
(hd2,msdos1)
### PROBE OF /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part2
###
ext2
59c82698-6fcc-4512-a51c-261348d637da
/dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part2
(hd2,msdos2)
#
# DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE
#
# It is automatically generated by grub-mkconfig using templates
# from /etc/grub.d and settings from /etc/default/grub
#
### BEGIN /etc/grub.d/00_header ###
if [ -s $prefix/grubenv ]; then
set have_grubenv=true
load_env
fi
set default=0
if [ ${prev_saved_entry} ]; then
set saved_entry=${prev_saved_entry}
save_env saved_entry
set prev_saved_entry=
save_env prev_saved_entry
set boot_once=true
fi
function savedefault {
if [ -z ${boot_once} ]; then
saved_entry=${chosen}
save_env saved_entry
fi
}
function recordfail {
set recordfail=1
if [ -n ${have_grubenv} ]; then if [ -z ${boot_once} ]; then save_env
recordfail; fi; fi
}
function load_video {
insmod vbe
insmod vga
}
insmod part_msdos
insmod ext2
set root='(hd2,msdos3)'
search --no-floppy --fs-uuid --set b9ad85b7-d8b0-42f9-8c3a-c09a435cbe26
if loadfont /usr/share/grub/unicode.pf2 ; then
set gfxmode=640x480
load_video
insmod gfxterm
fi
terminal_output gfxterm
insmod part_msdos
insmod ext2
set root='(hd2,msdos3)'
search --no-floppy --fs-uuid --set b9ad85b7-d8b0-42f9-8c3a-c09a435cbe26
set locale_dir=($root)/boot/grub/locale
set lang=de
insmod gettext
if [ ${recordfail} = 1 ]; then
set timeout=-1
else
set timeout=10
fi
### END /etc/grub.d/00_header ###
### BEGIN /etc/grub.d/05_debian_theme ###
set menu_color_normal=white/black
set menu_color_highlight=black/light-gray
### END /etc/grub.d/05_debian_theme ###
### BEGIN /etc/grub.d/10_linux ###
menuentry 'Ubuntu, with Linux 2.6.35-22-generic' --class ubuntu --class
gnu-linux --class gnu --class os {
recordfail
insmod part_msdos
insmod ext2
set root='(hd2,msdos3)'
search --no-floppy --fs-uuid --set b9ad85b7-d8b0-42f9-8c3a-c09a435cbe26
linux /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.35-22-generic
root=UUID=b9ad85b7-d8b0-42f9-8c3a-c09a435cbe26 ro quiet splash
initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.35-22-generic
}
menuentry 'Ubuntu, with Linux 2.6.35-22-generic (recovery mode)' --class ubuntu
--class gnu-linux --class gnu --class os {
recordfail
insmod part_msdos
insmod ext2
set root='(hd2,msdos3)'
search --no-floppy --fs-uuid --set b9ad85b7-d8b0-42f9-8c3a-c09a435cbe26
echo'Loading Linux 2.6.35-22-generic ...'
linux /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.35-22-generic
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: Now, moving between 6.0.0 and 6.0.1 shouldn't have been a problem, but I suspect you actually would have had issues rebooting your 6.0.0 system even without the 6.0.1 updates, since you didn't have your fstab in order. Grub can't be wrong, cause it is working in your system. So, the only conclusion is: my fstab must be wrong. Hm ... I think, that's the same wrong reduction of facts, than my saying: grub is wrong. So let me state, debian 6.0 was working fine til the last update. On a complex system (yes, for me, linux is quite a complex system) the truth may be somewhat different. May be, we both are wrong. So I did some researches with my system constellation (all 8 drives active): 1.) A fresh installation from debian 6.0 netinst CD results in an unbootable system, even using a single partition installation target. 2.) following the advices of: grub-mkdevicemap grub-install /dev/disk/by-id/ata-INTEL_SSDSA2M040G2GC_CVGB0061021D040GGN update-grub results in an unbootable system 3.) at first sight it looks like ubuntu 10.10 is using the same grub variant, but a closer look shows, that on ubuntu there's no /boot/device.map 4.) booting the debian 6.0 netinst CD in rescue64 mode and chrooting the ubuntu installation, a grub-install /dev/sde brings my system back into play Don't take me wrong! I'm no friend of ubuntu and changing to ubuntu is no acceptable solution for me. But - if having an unused ubuntu installation is the only solution to get a bootable system - of cause, I will use it. Well, I stil believe, that some of the last update was not good enuf for debian stable ... kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103230659.49713.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Mi, 23 mar 11, 07:30:48, Geronimo wrote: I have a whish to the debian istaller disk. Find attached an image of the current menue, where one should select a root partition in rescue mode. This menue is quite useless, if you have an external controller, as device names may change on every boot. What about extending the menue, that it shows the same info as cat /proc/partitions ? The device name together with size information is good to identify the right partion. Adding the label of a partition would be extraordinary :) I agree. How about a wishlist bug against debian-installer? Ok, when I found out, how to do that, I'll do it. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103230958.54237.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Tom H wrote: - grub wasn't updated for 6.0.1. Its last squeeze update was on 17 January, pre-6.0 release (6 February IIRC). So, strictly speaking, it isn't grub that's broken grub. Ok, then I apologize everything I wrote about grub. - Do the grub.cfg entries for squeeze in squeeze and maverick match for the insmods, the grub root, and the system root? I attached an archive with diffs of complete grub.cfg and just the menue entries. - Does grub-probe on squeeze and maverick return the same values? I'll try to workout all steps. kind regards Gero grub-diffs.tar.bz2 Description: application/bzip-compressed-tar
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Tom H wrote: At what point does booting from squeeze's grub does the boot process fail? And what's the error (if any)? Grub fails after writing Grub black on white, before showing the menue. I don't know how much code fits into the mbr and I don't know, whether grub is stil busy or whether the mbr-jump ended in nirvana. And what's the error (if any)? No error-message at all. kind regads Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103231019.33649.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Tom H wrote: - Does grub-probe on squeeze and maverick return the same values? Can you please verify the script checkSystem.sh, that I got u right? Especially the ubuntu / chainload part? Should I replace X and Y from the line: set root=(hdX,Y) ## using X and Y for /mnt/squeeze/boot or are that values replaced by any of grubs scripts? Shouldn't the path of 40_custom be /etc/grub.d? Neither debian, nor ubuntu has a /boot/grub.d directory. kind regards Gero ### PROBE OF / ### ext2 7ce6540f-5ffe-445d-9bbf-d41652854700 /dev/sde1 (hd4,msdos1) ### PROBE OF /boot ### ext2 59c82698-6fcc-4512-a51c-261348d637da /dev/sde2 (hd4,msdos2) ### PROBE OF /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part1 ### ext2 7ce6540f-5ffe-445d-9bbf-d41652854700 /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part1 (hd4,msdos1) ### PROBE OF /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part2 ### ext2 59c82698-6fcc-4512-a51c-261348d637da /dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SATA_INTEL_SSDSA2M04CVGB0061021D040GGN-part2 (hd4,msdos2) checkSystem.sh Description: application/shellscript
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Tom H wrote: - grub wasn't updated for 6.0.1. Its last squeeze update was on 17 January, pre-6.0 release (6 February IIRC). So, strictly speaking, it isn't grub that's broken grub. I attached the hex-view of mbr written by ubuntu and mbr written by debian. May be it can help finding a track to the problem. kind regards Gero 0x: eb 63 90 10 8e d0 bc 00 b0 b8 00 00 8e d8 8e c0 fb be 00 7c bf 00 06 b9 00 02 f3 a4 ea 21 06 00 0x0020: 00 be be 07 38 04 75 0b 83 c6 10 81 fe fe 07 75 f3 eb 16 b4 02 b0 01 bb 00 7c b2 80 8a 74 03 02 0x0040: ff 00 00 20 01 00 00 00 00 02 fa 90 90 f6 c2 80 75 02 b2 80 ea 59 7c 00 00 31 00 80 01 00 00 00 0x0060: 00 00 00 00 ff fa eb 07 f6 c2 80 75 02 b2 80 ea 74 7c 00 00 31 c0 8e d8 8e d0 bc 00 20 fb a0 64 0x0080: 7c 3c ff 74 02 88 c2 52 be 80 7d e8 1c 01 be 05 7c f6 c2 80 74 48 b4 41 bb aa 55 cd 13 5a 52 72 0x00a0: 3d 81 fb 55 aa 75 37 83 e1 01 74 32 31 c0 89 44 04 40 88 44 ff 89 44 02 c7 04 10 00 66 8b 1e 5c 0x00c0: 7c 66 89 5c 08 66 8b 1e 60 7c 66 89 5c 0c c7 44 06 00 70 b4 42 cd 13 72 05 bb 00 70 eb 76 b4 08 0x00e0: cd 13 73 0d f6 c2 80 0f 84 d8 00 be 8b 7d e9 82 00 66 0f b6 c6 88 64 ff 40 66 89 44 04 0f b6 d1 0x0100: c1 e2 02 88 e8 88 f4 40 89 44 08 0f b6 c2 c0 e8 02 66 89 04 66 a1 60 7c 66 09 c0 75 4e 66 a1 5c 0x0120: 7c 66 31 d2 66 f7 34 88 d1 31 d2 66 f7 74 04 3b 44 08 7d 37 fe c1 88 c5 30 c0 c1 e8 02 08 c1 88 0x0140: d0 5a 88 c6 bb 00 70 8e c3 31 db b8 01 02 cd 13 72 1e 8c c3 60 1e b9 00 01 8e db 31 f6 bf 00 80 0x0160: 8e c6 fc f3 a5 1f 61 ff 26 5a 7c be 86 7d eb 03 be 95 7d e8 34 00 be 9a 7d e8 2e 00 cd 18 eb fe 0x0180: 47 52 55 42 20 00 47 65 6f 6d 00 48 61 72 64 20 44 69 73 6b 00 52 65 61 64 00 20 45 72 72 6f 72 0x01a0: 0d 0a 00 bb 01 00 b4 0e cd 10 ac 3c 00 75 f4 c3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ac 99 05 00 00 00 00 01 0x01c0: 01 00 83 fe ff ff 3f 00 00 00 f5 48 80 02 80 fe ff ff 83 fe ff ff 00 50 80 02 00 e8 0b 00 00 fe 0x01e0: ff ff 83 fe ff ff 00 38 8c 02 00 78 1c 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 55 aa 0x: eb 63 90 10 8e d0 bc 00 b0 b8 00 00 8e d8 8e c0 fb be 00 7c bf 00 06 b9 00 02 f3 a4 ea 21 06 00 0x0020: 00 be be 07 38 04 75 0b 83 c6 10 81 fe fe 07 75 f3 eb 16 b4 02 b0 01 bb 00 7c b2 80 8a 74 03 02 0x0040: ff 00 00 20 01 00 00 00 00 02 fa 90 90 f6 c2 80 75 02 b2 80 ea 59 7c 00 00 31 00 80 01 00 00 00 0x0060: 00 00 00 00 ff fa 90 90 f6 c2 80 75 02 b2 80 ea 74 7c 00 00 31 c0 8e d8 8e d0 bc 00 20 fb a0 64 0x0080: 7c 3c ff 74 02 88 c2 52 bb 17 04 80 27 03 74 06 be 88 7d e8 1c 01 be 05 7c f6 c2 80 74 48 b4 41 0x00a0: bb aa 55 cd 13 5a 52 72 3d 81 fb 55 aa 75 37 83 e1 01 74 32 31 c0 89 44 04 40 88 44 ff 89 44 02 0x00c0: c7 04 10 00 66 8b 1e 5c 7c 66 89 5c 08 66 8b 1e 60 7c 66 89 5c 0c c7 44 06 00 70 b4 42 cd 13 72 0x00e0: 05 bb 00 70 eb 76 b4 08 cd 13 73 0d f6 c2 80 0f 84 d0 00 be 93 7d e9 82 00 66 0f b6 c6 88 64 ff 0x0100: 40 66 89 44 04 0f b6 d1 c1 e2 02 88 e8 88 f4 40 89 44 08 0f b6 c2 c0 e8 02 66 89 04 66 a1 60 7c 0x0120: 66 09 c0 75 4e 66 a1 5c 7c 66 31 d2 66 f7 34 88 d1 31 d2 66 f7 74 04 3b 44 08 7d 37 fe c1 88 c5 0x0140: 30 c0 c1 e8 02 08 c1 88 d0 5a 88 c6 bb 00 70 8e c3 31 db b8 01 02 cd 13 72 1e 8c c3 60 1e b9 00 0x0160: 01 8e db 31 f6 bf 00 80 8e c6 fc f3 a5 1f 61 ff 26 5a 7c be 8e 7d eb 03 be 9d 7d e8 34 00 be a2 0x0180: 7d e8 2e 00 cd 18 eb fe 47 52 55 42 20 00 47 65 6f 6d 00 48 61 72 64 20 44 69 73 6b 00 52 65 61 0x01a0: 64 00 20 45 72 72 6f 72 0d 0a 00 bb 01 00 b4 0e cd 10 ac 3c 00 75 f4 c3 ac 99 05 00 00 00 00 01 0x01c0: 01 00 83 fe ff ff 3f 00 00 00 f5 48 80 02 80 fe ff ff 83 fe ff ff 00 50 80 02 00 e8 0b 00 00 fe 0x01e0: ff ff 83 fe ff ff 00 38 8c 02 00 78 1c 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 55 aa
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: On 2011-03-23 00:59:49 Geronimo wrote: Hello, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: Now, moving between 6.0.0 and 6.0.1 shouldn't have been a problem, but I suspect you actually would have had issues rebooting your 6.0.0 system even without the 6.0.1 updates, since you didn't have your fstab in order. Grub can't be wrong, cause it is working in your system. I didn't say that. I know. It was kind of provacative black/white conclusion Don't take me too serious! On a complex system (yes, for me, linux is quite a complex system) the truth may be somewhat different. May be, we both are wrong. How complex is your set up? I'm using mdadm RAID 1 for /boot and GRUB mbr, mdadm RAID 1 + mdadm RAID 5 inside a LVM2 volume group that provides separate LVs for /, /usr, /usr/local, /opt, /srv, /var, /var/cache, /var/tmp, and /home plus /tmp on tmpfs. I use raid on my servers only, which I did not update to 6.0.1 - and I won't do that, til the bug has been found and eliminated. On my desktop system, fstab has 40 active entries. Maybe we both a wrong is probably the most likely case. :( :D As Tom stated, grub has not been updated, so the only remaining possibility is, that a kernel change makes grub fail ... So I took a closer look to dpkg.log and the kernel has been changed. I did not find a log-entry for execution of update-grub, but I'm quite sure, that this has been run (isn't this true for every kernel change?). I remember old days, where kernel had a parameter like boot from externals first. As today it's most probabely, that internal controllers (from mainbord) are faster than external controllers, an option like internal controller always is first would be quite a good option. May be, that UUID and Label relaxes harddisk handling, but surely there's stil a lot of software around, that uses /dev/sdxx, or like grub (hd#, partition#). It's quite annoying, booting from debian installer in rescue mode and at the menue, where a root partition has to be choosen, you have to select i.e. /dev/sda1 - and after starting a shell into that root partition, the device suddenly is /dev/sde1 - and mount, cat /proc/partition and df -T all show different device names for the same partition. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103231502.49691.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, bri...@aracnet.com wrote: Geronimo geronimo...@arcor.de wrote: Tom H wrote: - grub wasn't updated for 6.0.1. Its last squeeze update was on 17 January, pre-6.0 release (6 February IIRC). So, strictly speaking, it isn't grub that's broken grub. Ok, then I apologize everything I wrote about grub. don't apologize. a lot of people have had trouble with grub. For me its a debian QA issue. grub may have bugs, as well as linux kernel - and of cause, each bug may break a system or lead to fresh installation, which does not work. That's no problem - if it happens at sid or testing. ... but for me, its completely unacceptable having this happen to debian stable. No other linux distribution has that QA-level of debian, so it may happen on every other linux too. Debian stable is a synonym for really good (and unreached by others) QA - and this has been broken now. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103231514.04317.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Jochen Schulz wrote: AFAICS, we can rule out the kernel as the cuplrit completely, as grub doesn't even get that far. VETO - after reboot, you might be right, but what happens during update-grub? I'm quite sure, that update-grub broke my system, but I don't have any idea, who takes part on that job. I'd say Grub2 and/or your mainboard (unlikely) has a problem that is in no way related to your upgrade to 6.0.1 (but to stable in general). VETO again! Before update 6.0.1 I could install a new system and during last 6 weeks there have been several updates that triggered an update-grub, which did not break my system that heavyly, that I wasn't able to handle. What I meant was to physically attach disks to different ports. Yes, I tried that, but it is no acceptable solution to me, as the controller is not as fast as the internal ones and it makes no sense to attach the drives with expected heavy load to a slow controller. When the wrong disk is first, system start is not possible. Meaning the BIOS doesn't find a boot loader? As every of my drives had an installed grub in mbr, it did not happen. Same effect than today, where system hangs after grubs welcome message. I'll try that again with my cleaned drives. Sorry for stressing that again, but reporting problems here will not get the bug fixed. Ever. LOL - hey, I'm not that thin-skinned :) You don't stress me - my crude post came from my infinite disappointment, not why I was stressed. I think, before a bug can be fixed, it has to be identified - and who ever can help on that task is welcome. When the bug is identified, I'm willing to file a bug report or what ever you want me to do. Although I don't believe in that, I accept the possibility, that I made a mistake ... I am sorry that I only ask question that apparently lead you nowhere. I am just stabbing in the dark and I am afraid we will never get to the source of the problem ... Never mind - I know that buisness :) unless you start from scratch and document every step you do in detail. What's unclear from (my post from 06:59:49 today): 1.) A fresh installation from debian 6.0 netinst CD results in an unbootable system, even using a single partition installation target. I did that fresh installation yesterday or the day before yesterday - so it leaded to a debian 6.0.1 - as the netinst CD is just an installer which updates to the current system. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103231656.14920.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Jochen Schulz wrote: Geronimo: Jochen Schulz wrote: Geronimo: the last update of debian broke my system completely! I am very sorry for your wasted time and loss of data. I see why you need to let off steam. Thank you very much! - usually I'm not that coarse. That's ok. I am glad my mail didn't anger you even more. :) No person caused any anger to me. I got angry and frustrated by the fact, that the same issue, I reported before squeeze becoming stable now came back to break my stable system. I confess, that I might have glorified debian comunity too much - and may be, my anger arised about the difference between my thinking and reality ... - You have five disks (SSD or hard disks, shouldn't matter): / on sda1, ext4 /boot on sda2, ext2 swap on sdc1 /usr on sdc2, ext4 (btw, it's UNIX system ressources, not user) another swap on sdd2 /var on sdd2, ext4 sdb and sde appear to be unused with respect to the squeeze system (You may use them with squeeze, but they don't hold any system-relevant data.) Not quite. I have four system disks and a hotswap backplane with four user disks, which are powered on demand, so system may have four to eight disks. The system disks are attached to the main board and are permanently powered. The backplane-disks are disks exchanged with other machines and they don't contain system relevant data. Each disk of a pool of exchangeable disks is labeled to the same name, so I can mount different disks from the same pool without changing fstab. sdb is a System disk with data, sde is a user disk with data. What happened: After the system was broken, I was stuck to the cd/dvd I had, which is the debian installer disk 6.0 stable and an ubuntu 10.10 live. The debian installer disk is my first choice for rescue operations, but I did not succeed to bring the system into play. So I startet the ubuntu live, to be able to google for recovery tips. I accidently found a script that tells me what grub sees from the disks. Sadly I placed that in virtual storage so I don't have the results and I don't remember the name of the script. ... anyway: The script told me, that every disk contained a grub installation in mbr, so I thought, might be a problem for grub and searched for a way to remove grub from mbr. The only way, I found, was a dd sequence that wipes out the first block. What I did not know before: that dd sequence removes all partition data. I executed that dd sequence against 7 of my disks and after reboot I was so *frightened* about the damage I did. So I searched for a way to recover partition informations. That leaded me to testdisk, which worked fine for the SSDs. Therefore 3 of my system disks are ok again. The rest of the disks is damaged. I run testdisk on the VelociRaptor too, and let it write the found data, but the result was wrong. So my current state is: one disk with wrong partition table and three disks with wiped out partition table. All four disks contain valid data with usage of 50 to 90 percent with sizes from 150GB to 2TB. - Some of these disks are attached to a secondary SATA controller (RocketRAID 230x). - Other disks are attached to the mainboard's (GA880GM-UD2H) controller. - Your setup worked fine even after you upgraded from lenny to squeeze. Yep. - You recently upgraded to the next point release and in the process were asked to reboot. After that, your system didn't boot. Btw, I am curious what exactly triggered the reboot warning. I cannot remember having seen that. I'm using KDE as desktop and the message arised from KDE. AFAIK it was the same, when I used gnome desktop. - Which disks are connected to which controller? As told above, the system disks are attached to the main board. The system disks are the three SSDs and a WD VelociRaptor (sdb) - How did you upgrade to 6.0.1? I have a bash alias for this task: alias dist-upgrade='apt-get update apt-get dist-upgrade apt-get clean' That get's executed (nearly) every day before I start work. excerpt from dpkg.log is attached. - How often did you reboot the system after the upgrade from lenny to squeeze? I am not interested in the exact number, I just want to ensure you did it at all. :) May be 400 times? - Not sure. - How did you configure the secondary controller? AHCI? You mean the secondary controller from mainboard? - Yes, AHCI. - Have you tried shuffling your disks around? Does the system respond differently depending on the controller for / or /boot? The system shuffles the disks around when I switch a disk from backplane on/off or enter a USB-stick, so yes - I'm very used to reorder disks at BIOS. When the wrong disk is first, system start is not possible. So, may be you can guide me to a better use case, when the system is broken and the machine does not work any more. Well, I am not too proficient in these things either. I throw my problems at Google
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Chris Bannister wrote: On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 06:53:38PM +0100, Geronimo wrote: I had the same issue when squeeze was testing and I reported it to this ML. Mmmm, so there is an already known issue. Not quite. Last time I changed the fs-type from ext3 to ext4 and restored the system from tarball, so it might be possible, that I did a mistake during that step. I was recommended to setup a fresh system - and I followed that advice. ... and I was already used to patch grub.cfg after each update, that caused a grub-update. But this time a patch of grub.cfg did not bring the system back into play. So in reality, it is not really a Debian issue. Hm, don't understand that. If a debian stable system is unbootable after update - is that a debian issue? I did not change anything respect to hardware. by the way: I looked at output from smartctrl of the system disk, which has an age of less than one year: power cycle count: 641 power on hours: 3075 Have you considered taking this up with upstream? Don't know - what do you want me to do? If you know the fix, of course: No, as I stated before: I have no idea of system internals like boot process. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103220746.45501.geronimo...@arcor.de
What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, the last update of debian broke my system completely! After dist-upgrade I got the advice, that I should reboot the system. Nothing special, so I rebooted the system. That was the start of the misery. Grub was not able to find its boot partition and for such - it hung before showing up the menue. So I tried to boot from debian installer disk using rescue mode - all is fine, I could reinstall grub - installer says no error but on reboot the same problem. I don't have any exotic hardware, except the fact, that I use 8 harddisc at my desktop system and for so I have an external SATA-controller. I reported problems with grub about 6 weeks ago and I got the advice to create an ext2 boot partition and reinstall debian. I followed that advice and the system worked fine since then, but now I get the same trouble again. Years ago I came to debian, cause Suse bugged me with having to reinstall after each release change. I tried nearly every available linux and when I came to debian stable (woody at that time), I felt at home. Since then, I only had problems when I tried other linux or even debian sid - so I had to confess: I'm a debian stable user. Whenever colleagues or friends told me about problems with their OS I said: Hey, move to debian stable - and the sun is shining :) And now this. *FUCK* ! Yes, I'm too agitated to mask this fact/word. What's so difficult to add a working boot-manager? Or even test it? How could that *FUCKING* grub2 ever got into debian stable? When I read docs from grub2 - it looks like it is able to read all types of partition tables and all types of filesystems ... ... and now a system breaks on the fact of having an external SATA- controller?!? Is that really so exotic, that no one tests that, before moving packages into stable? ... and the installer? Crashes on installing, when /usr and /var are different partitions which should not be formatted. Huh??? Is that stable? When I look at the output of fdisk -p each harddisk has a unique identifier, which keeps being the same after reboot. So why not kick that buggy hdx tokens from grub.cfg and use the real disk-identifier? I have no idea about boot process, but I know software development and testing. HELL! - I'm so disappointed about the last update - I can't tell you. For me, debian stable is not only the OS I use, but it is also my religion: stability rules over visual effects. Seems as this is no more true for debian stable - so welcome to quality of microsoft. You have to format all your disks to install an OS - unbelievable! Today I tried to reinstall debian - but that did not work either. Guess what I had to do, do bring my system up? - Yes, I had to remove the external SATA- controller and for so loose half of my disks. No, the controller is not defect. Yesterday I run prime for several hours. From rescue disk I made some mistakes, when I tried to remove grub from other disks mbr, which now causes the loss of lots of data. I only solved to recover the small disks usings testdisk. The disks above 100G seem to be too big for testdisk - so I have to work on data recovery. I hope, that debian changes the project manager back to a person that knows the meaning of stable. The current state is not acceptable, disappointing and a disgrace for the name of debian! kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103211259.03018.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Christ Almighty... where have you been? busy inventing PEBCAK issues :) The kernel went to indeterminate drive ordering *years* ago. That's why fstab now uses UUID or LABEL to associate partitions with mount points. Hey, may be u missed some of my writings. I wrote, that I came to debian at woody time and from then on, I'm used to *daily* (!) dist-upgrages ... so the last upgrade was from debian 6.0 to 6.1 And yes of cause - I use LABEL and UUID in fstab for years ;) If you read my writing carefully, you'll notice that I wrote, that grub has problems with changing drive order. The point is, in grub.cfg each partition is mentioned by (hd?, msdos?) and hd? never matches. Last weeks I managed grub update errors by manually editing grub.cfg (I know it should not be done, but it was the only way for me to get the system running). Stable probably WILL break at updates, but it SHOULDN'T between updates. I don't remember, when I came to debian stable, guess that will be more than 5 years - and during that time, *no* dist-upgrade *ever* broke my system. - til today - Therefore - for me - debian stable shows up, what's possible to OS stability. Now I built a new partition, where I installed Ubuntu and now I can boot in my old Debian stable system having the controller plugged in - using grub from ubuntu. ... by the way: the controller is this (excerpt from lspci): SCSI storage controller: HighPoint Technologies, Inc. RocketRAID 230x 4 Port SATA-II Controller (rev 02) and the mainboard is a GA880GM-UD2H Boot-drive is an Intel X25-V and /usr and /var are on OCZ Vertex 2E each. It has been said, that debian 6.0 is completely free - so if the controller worked the last months, what is more free now, that it won't work with 6.01? Does anyone know a tool, that can recover (deleted) partion table from disks 500GB? Any hint is appreciated. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103211753.16501.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Jochen Schulz wrote: Geronimo: the last update of debian broke my system completely! I am very sorry for your wasted time and loss of data. I see why you need to let off steam. Thank you very much! - usually I'm not that coarse. Nevertheless I think this threads leads nowhere unless you are more specific about the hardware in use and what kind of upgrade you actually ran. Instead of insulting Debian developers you could try to help them get the problem fixed (or make them aware in the first place). With my last post I wrote about my specific hardware. If you tell me, what I could do to improve system and how I could do - of cause I'm willing to do any tests, that help improve system! ... and now a system breaks on the fact of having an external SATA- controller?!? Is that really so exotic, that no one tests that, before moving packages into stable? If you are under the impression that every package needs to pass coordinated QA testing before it enters stable, then you are wrong. I followed quite a time several debian MLs and yes, my opinion from reading the discussion between developers was, that debian has a coordinated QA testing. If nobody tested your setup using testing or sid, then you are basically out of luck. I had the same issue when squeeze was testing and I reported it to this ML. But most comments leaded to my own problem. No one was willing to accept, that there's a big issue with grub. Even now - I don't have the impression, that anybody accepts, that my situation is a grub issue. ... and the installer? Crashes on installing, when /usr and /var are different partitions which should not be formatted. Huh??? This looks like a separate issue which you might want to report against debian-installer. BTW, using unformatted /var and/or /usr for a fresh installation looks like a bad idea to me. So, may be you can guide me to a better use case, when the system is broken and the machine does not work any more. I'm not a system specialist - just a user, so I do what I know or what I can google about. Any advice on how to do it better is welcome. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103211853.39001.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Ron Johnson wrote: On 03/21/2011 11:53 AM, Geronimo wrote: And yes of cause - I use LABEL and UUID in fstab for years ;) So you're not using UUID in grub. Ok - that's a challenge Of cause, I use UUID in grub. But if you look at grub.cfg, theres one place, where UUID is used and other places where (hd?, msdos?) is used. And all (hd?, ...) entries are wrong - almost always. Of course, it could be that your mobo doesn't like grub2. Since the grub and Debian developers know that, they made a big, fat warning when wanting to install grub2, asking if you're sure that you want to do it, since grub2 is still in beta, so it might break. Huh? - Did you ever installed a debian 6.x? There's no choice to use another boot-manager. You have to use grub (which silently is grub2) or you have to use grub2. If grub2 is really stil beta - what the hell does it do in debian stable? I tried to use super grub2 disk but that disk was not able to find any bootable partition too. It hangs during scan. Grub from debian 6.0 had no problem with my system. Same is true for Ubuntu 10.10 So where's my mistake? kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103211908.33140.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Tom H wrote: On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Geronimo geronimo...@arcor.de wrote: And yes of cause - I use LABEL and UUID in fstab for years ;) If you read my writing carefully, you'll notice that I wrote, that grub has problems with changing drive order. The point is, in grub.cfg each partition is mentioned by (hd?, msdos?) and hd? never matches. Last weeks I managed grub update errors by manually editing grub.cfg (I know it should not be done, but it was the only way for me to get the system running). Look at /boot/grub/device.map. It sets up a correspondence between grub's hdX and devices in /dev/disk/by-id/... so it doesn't depend on the kernel's device names. I tried to change that file, but I suspect, that nobody cares about that changes. I did that already about 6 weeks ago - and it did not change anything then, so I did not try it again. Run grub-mkdevicemap and grub-install '(hdX)' where (hdX) corresponds to the disk in /boot/grub/device.map on which you want to install grub. That's what I usually try booting from debian installer disk using rescue mode. The point is, grub hangs after showing the GRUB black on white before displaying the menue. Furthermore, it's fine to have a rant and blame this or that for your problem but weren't you asked whether you wanted to chainload grub2 from grub1 when you went through the upgrade? Did you choose that option? Did you test grub2 that way? I beg your pardon. I remember that question a little bit, but its so long ago, that I really can't remember. I switched to squeeze, when debian anounced the feature freeze. I think that might be about one year ago or so. That's why I don't understand the behaviour. Grub2 worked fine a really long time. Problems startet with squeeze becoming stable, or quite a bit before - not sure (may be about 6 weeks ago) I don't remember seeing a link (or, preferably, attachment) of your boot.cfg and output of /sbin/blkid | sort. Ok, the latter is attached (well - just half of the disks), the former does not exists any more, cause I purged grub2 I chose LILO (thanks, Boyd - beware of the inevitable questions!). LOL - yes, I tried that too. liloconfig states, that it does not recognize my disks. Did I mention, that I use ext4? And it is actually possible to ask for GRUB-legacy. I tried that too. Installation failed - and I didn't dig any further. I can't believe, but having ubuntu installed to another partition, system now works fine - and I'm quite sure, that ubuntu uses grub2 too ... kind regards Gero /dev/sda1: LABEL=StdRoot UUID=7ce6540f-5ffe-445d-9bbf-d41652854700 TYPE=ext4 /dev/sda2: LABEL=boot UUID=59c82698-6fcc-4512-a51c-261348d637da TYPE=ext3 SEC_TYPE=ext2 /dev/sda3: LABEL=Deb_Rescue UUID=b9ad85b7-d8b0-42f9-8c3a-c09a435cbe26 TYPE=ext4 /dev/sdb1: UUID=78c0ca79-1306-4250-9b7e-9e154c54eb50 SEC_TYPE=ext2 TYPE=ext3 /dev/sdb2: UUID=e2c0528e-4294-4b1b-bc0c-20819d0f5b6c SEC_TYPE=ext2 TYPE=ext3 /dev/sdc1: UUID=129580e7-04cf-4700-82df-8ef9f6bd8fe7 TYPE=swap /dev/sdc2: LABEL=Squeeze_User UUID=44403194-a873-48ac-978c-b08a13c5d756 TYPE=ext4 /dev/sdd1: UUID=750773ee-f955-4f36-9c5c-1036adaeafb6 TYPE=swap /dev/sdd2: LABEL=Squeeze_Var UUID=55141d3b-4331-4f4a-b127-8ea77121a483 TYPE=ext4 /dev/sde1: UUID=2462a61a-8864-486b-820a-526a870a5452 TYPE=xfs
Re: What happened to debian - does stable keep having any meaning?
Hello, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Lu, 21 mar 11, 20:28:51, Geronimo wrote: Ok, the latter is attached (well - just half of the disks), the former does not exists any more, cause I purged grub2 Too bad, now we can't investigate what was wrong. Just for the archives, here's an excerpt from a working grub.cfg from a fresh squeeze install: Ok, I promise you to reinstall grub2 and do all tests you propose, but not today. I've so lot work to do, I currently don't have the time for experiments. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201103220600.52363.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: KPackage
Hello, lrhorer wrote: For whatever reason, someone has decided to remove KPackage from the Debian distro. 'Really bad idea, if you ask me. Great idea - if you ask me :) Is there a good way to get KPackage back onto the other system? Is there some way we could get someone to reverse the decision to remove KPackage from Debian? Try Synaptic ;) Works fine even on KDE systems, is better organized, offers better search, ... ... no I don't get payed for this writing :D KPackage is not worth loosing a word about it. Just *imho* of cause ;) kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201102081105.05708.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired problem around grub2
Hello, Camaleón wrote: On Tue, 08 Feb 2011 06:27:02 +0100, Geronimo wrote: But I can't state, whether grub-install puts a wrong pointer into mbr or whether the drive order changed on reboot and grub is not able to resolve the target of that pointer. One of the three causes troubles. The former would give you no GRUB menu at all, the latter will present the GRUB menu and then fail with some kind of error. OK, that the former happens - I don't get a menue at all. So if you have any hints/testcases - I'm willing to test, but I don't by myself what to do to locate the error. You can try to chainload the failed GRUB (boot from the GRUB that works and then call the GRUB that fails). Yes, I know you are planning to remove the new partition to make room for windows, but this is just for testing purposes :-) Bah - don't worry about my windows plans at all ;) They don't have any relevance. I'll need windows in may be two months or so - no hurry at all. And you can't boot neither from SGD? Who drunk you coke? ;) - Sorry, what's SGD? I'm not habitated to acronyms at all. No matter how I do it - when I install grub from an active partition 2, than grub shows a menue at reboot and I can boot into both partitions (depending on my selection) When I install grub from partition 1, grub will not show a menue at reboot. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201102081117.27434.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired problem around grub2
Hello, Camaleón wrote: Then you can also think in making room for a small /boot partition O:-) Yes, doing so is not the problem. I only don't understand the benefit of doing so. I quite a deterministic person - so if you can tell me a good reason, I will follow your plans. Sorry, it's an acronym for SuperGrubDisk. Did you try to directly boot your first partition from there? I don't remember if you tried to install GRUB2 from there or also tested a direct booting. Hm - I tried to boot and I tried to install. I did not see any difference to using the netinst-CD of debian, which offers a rescue mode. Afaik ubuntu offers the option too, boot from harddisk. The point is, whatever I tried, no CD was able to boot my partition. Selecting boot from harddisk freezes the system. No grub menu at all. I'd like to understand, what's going on. Its really crazy - when I update grub installation from partition one (which comes up as sdd1) the generated device map has that drive as hd0. When I boot into partition 2, device map shows the boot drive as hd3 but the root-partition is sda2 I'm quite confused =8-| kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201102081311.52413.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: Firware drivers?
Hello, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh u made my day :D The release notes are a hand-holding document. If something is important enough to be a pitfall during the upgrade process, it needs to be described in the *upgrade* section of the release notes. implied in the what's new doesn't cut it. Sorry, but that's nothing new. The struggles of debian to become free is a story of various years (not days or months). I think, the current state is important and it is great, that the debian team has achieved it. Now its time, to become more pragmatic, which means, debian should offer installation media, that include non-free firmware ... That installation media should be marked as non-free, but I think, it is vital to have it. Many people have to install machines without internet access, so its not possible during installation follow a link or build an additional cd. This will happen mostly in comercial environments, but it happened to me at home too. So I think: stay friends, be generous and let us keep on working for a better world :) kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201102081451.00235.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired problem around grub2
Hello, Camaleón wrote: Well, GRUB2 is having problems to boot from you current cloned partition but is fine installed under a brand-new one. Having a small dedicated / boot partition will solve the issue (I hope!) and you can then use the remainder space for other OSes :-) Just to let you know: the extra partition didn't change anything. The boot-process stil needs that fresh installed partition and is not working without. I compared all files, I found related to grub, but I could not find any difference. So I take that system for broken and go for new installation. Enuf time wasted! Thanks a lot for your attention! kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201102081645.15636.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired problem around grub2
Hello, tv.deb...@googlemail.com wrote: Hello, did you check (blkid, vol_id ...) that you don't have two partitions with the same UUID, since one is a restored image it's possible that it still has the original UUID, and grub is going to look at UUID's first. My 2 cents... Good point! - No, I did not thought about that. So just checked this: cat /proc/partitions | grep [0-9]$ | wc - result is 12 ls -l /dev/disk/by-uuid/ | wc - result is 12 too Thinking a bit closer to my way of backup and restore - it could not have happened. I used tar with --one-file-system for backup and -p on restore, which should not touch the uuid or label of a filesystem. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201102070954.15482.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired problem around grub2
Hello, tv.deb...@googlemail.com wrote: You'll have to keep looking then, sorry ! Thank you for your attention any way! kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201102071019.35237.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired problem around grub2
Hello, Camaleón wrote: On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 07:53:56 +0100, Geronimo wrote: Camaleón wrote: Maybe you can look into Rescatux (SuperGrubDisk) and try to install GRUB2 from there. At least with GRUB Legacy, SGD always worked fine for me. Thank you for that hint. I tried that CD, but the result did not differ from my manual tries. The point is, I have an external SATA-controller and disks change order too much times. That means, I don't have reliable device order. Installing GRUB and booting from GRUB are two separate things :-) For sure! But as I don't know, which of it causes the trouble, I told you the whole story. To me it appears, that grub-install changes a pointer in mbr and on reboot, grub looks like it does not find the target of that pointer. So it hangs in boot screen. But I can't state, whether grub-install puts a wrong pointer into mbr or whether the drive order changed on reboot and grub is not able to resolve the target of that pointer. One of the three causes troubles. So if you have any hints/testcases - I'm willing to test, but I don't by myself what to do to locate the error. Better that labels are UUID (Debian recommended) or ID for identifying devices. The short answer is - I use both labels and uuid, depending whether I wonna refer to a physical or logical partition. I use labels for the logical ones. Did you mark the old partition with the bootable flag? Yes. The major difference between the old and new partition: The old system uses separate drives for /usr and /var - the new one uses all in one partition. The minor difference: The old system is a complete GUI installation, the new one only basic system. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201102080627.02357.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired problem around grub2
Hello, Camaleón wrote: On Sun, 06 Feb 2011 06:35:50 +0100, Geronimo wrote: (...) The point is - the new system should be deleted - I want to install windows to that partition. So I need to install grub2 on my restored root partition. But whatever I try - grub will not work with that partition. (...) Maybe you can look into Rescatux (SuperGrubDisk) and try to install GRUB2 from there. At least with GRUB Legacy, SGD always worked fine for me. Thank you for that hint. I tried that CD, but the result did not differ from my manual tries. The point is, I have an external SATA-controller and disks change order too much times. That means, I don't have reliable device order. So I put a label on each vital partition and mount them by using the label in fstab. Works fine so far. What definitely does not work, is grub recognizing certain disk/partition. Although theres a device.map (with right identifiers for each drive), grub seem to not use it at all. Otherwise I don't understand current behaviour: Boot-drive is the first drive connected to internal controller (MB). The external controller has 3 drives connected, which means, boot-drive changes between sda and sdd. Boot-drive is configured to be the first drive (at BIOS bootdrive order). When I use the new install-CD of debian stable and boot into rescue-64bit, the root partition appears in the list as sda1 - so I select to start a commandline on that root partition. In that session, a df shows, that the root-partition is now sdd1 - so two different applications have different view to drives on the same run. Extremely strange ;) That boot-drive has 2 partitions, both containing debian squeeze with fstype ext4. The first partition is a restored image, which originated from an ext3 installation, the second partition is a fresh installation using ext4. Both installations are up-to-date. When I start with the rescue-mode from install-CD and open a session to partition2, I can install grub with grub-install and the system will be bootable. Doing the same with partition 1 - grub-install says no errors but on reboot grub hangs and is not able to start the menue - so the system is unbootable. I already tried to reinstall grub on partition 1 - but did not change anything. Is the boot-directory expected to be located on certain block, or what could be the reason of such a weired behavior? kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201102070753.56632.geronimo...@arcor.de
weired problem around grub2
Hello, I had to reorganize some of my partitions, cause space requirements changed during lifetime of that machine. I thought - not a big thing - saved backups of each partition and started repartitioning from a live system. Then I decided to change fstype from ext3 to ext4 and restored the backups. Things work fine except grub2. I was not able to reinstall grub2 to the restored system. So I installed a new debian on another partition of the same disk (beside the old root) with similar configuration. There grub2 works without problems. My old/restored root was recognized and I'm able to boot that system from grub installed to the new system. The point is - the new system should be deleted - I want to install windows to that partition. So I need to install grub2 on my restored root partition. But whatever I try - grub will not work with that partition. I copied devices.map from the fresh system and run grub-install, which seems to work, but on reboot grub hangs without showing the menue. As there's no problem booting debian from restored root, when grub is installed to the fresh installation, I guess, that the change of the fstype is no problem. When I boot from debian CD into rescue mode, selecting the recovered root as root and try to reinstall grub2 - the installer breaks, telling that it is not possible to install grub2 to that partition. Any hint, how I could recover grub2 on the restored rootfs? kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201102060635.50686.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
Hi,
On Monday, 13. Dec 2010, 09:26:50 shawn wilson wrote:
... easiest thing (since it's 03:23 here and i know off hand where to look)
is to 'cat /etc/timezone'
that file isn't the key and was the same on both systems.
Then I looked at /etc/adjtime and that told me the difference.
The key is /etc/default/rcS - where after a gnome installation utc is set to
true and after a kde installation utc is set to false.
May be this is an issue for the installer-crew.
I also found out, why I can't boot the other system.
Looking at /boot/grub/grub.cfg the entry for the other squeeze looks like:
menuentry Debian GNU/Linux, with Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 (on /dev/sde1) {
insmod part_msdos
insmod ext2
set root='(hd2,msdos1)'
...
but if you count the letters, sde is not hd2 but hd4 - so I patched that entry
and I successfully booted into that linux.
Now my question:
grub.cfg is generated by update-grub and that entry comes from os-prober.
The drive numbering is probabely a bug.
Is there a workaround that would work after the next update-grub too.
kind regards
Gero
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012131500.16685.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
On Monday, 13. Dec 2010, 16:00:20 Andrei Popescu wrote: On Lu, 13 dec 10, 15:00:16, Geronimo wrote: The key is /etc/default/rcS - where after a gnome installation utc is set to true and after a kde installation utc is set to false. May be this is an issue for the installer-crew. AFAIK this is only done when Windows is detected on that machine. Ok, that sounds reasonable. But then I miss an option, where I can overwrite that. I always install my machines using UTC - and I was quite off socks recognizing this time issue. I don't mind that windows is not able to show the right time - but I do mind this default on debian installation. This behaviour might be ok on suse or ubuntu - but not on debian. At least I consider debian the most professional linux - so it should not care about windows kiddies ;) kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012131613.48017.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
On Monday, 13. Dec 2010, 16:18:08 Klistvud wrote: On the other hand, I'm thankful to KDE 4, because it prompted me to (re)discover and adopt Gnome. ROFL Yes, in this sense I say thank you too :) I'm now using gnome for about half a year and it is quite attractive. Lean, reasonable menues and the best - things work as expected. There is very little functionality I miss at gnome. But i.e. I can't live without krusader, which is heavily bound to kde internals. Or look at Kalk - there's no serious alternative on gnome systems. I would like to support gnome, but I'm not the crack to build the missing stuff. any way - thanks to kde I looked around searching for alternatives. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012131634.58589.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
Hi, While I'm not familiar with Kalk Sorry, was my typo - I meant KCalc The gnome calculator is years away to be that usable. I've since settled for gnome-commander because it's a native Gnome app. I tried that commander, but it's an eternity away from krusader. So I have to live with small incompatibilities and use manual refresh or the like. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012131702.04156.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
On Monday, 13. Dec 2010, 16:51:02 Andrei Popescu wrote: On Lu, 13 dec 10, 16:13:47, Geronimo wrote: AFAIK this is only done when Windows is detected on that machine. Ok, that sounds reasonable. But then I miss an option, where I can overwrite that. For the installer? Yes - of cause! I know on installing gnome the installer asks, whether the hwclock is UTC. I don't remember, if the question appeared on kde-installation, but if it appeared and the user selects UTC, it is not reasonable, that the installer silently ignores the selection and changes hwclock to local mode. It would be an additional hassle for people installing dual-boot machines (usually not experienced Debian users) and it is easy enough to change in /etc/default/rcS On former systems there was a checkbox on desktop time configuration - so it was easy to switch system from utc to local mode or back to utc. I don't know, why this option disappeared. As you can see in this thread /etc/default/rcS is not well known to be related to time settings. I had to google too. So I think, the former behaviour was weired for windows user and the current behaviour is weired for linux users. Time settings are already protected to superuser - so why not bring that checkbox back to time settings dialog? May be with a little flyover help for windows user explaining the sense of that checkbox? For me - debian stands for the freedom of individual choice - it does not silently force any user to something he don't want (like i.e. ubuntu does). So its only consequent to have that choice during installation. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012131717.52072.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
On Monday, 13. Dec 2010, 17:51:17 Andrei Popescu wrote: Do you mean the mini-config done by KDE3 at first start? ... Or do you mean the old base-config program, back when the installation was done in two steps (sarge was the last release to use this IIRC)? No, I refer to the kde settings dialog, where all desktop-settings can be changed. The same configuration page is accessible from the clock in the destop-bar. I'm not shure, but I think the utc-option was there on kde 3.x I see that timesettings-dialog with that utc-checkbox in my mind, but I can't asure where it was from. The question is certainly in the installer, I checked the translation files (.po), but it is probably shown only on expert installs. Ok, I'll do another installation just to validate, that I did nothing wrong by myself. Additionally I'll try an expert installation too. Thanks for your attention and your time! kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012131805.57124.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
Am Montag, 13. Dezember 2010, 17:56:30 schrieb Andrei Popescu: Every time I experimented with two-pane file managers I kept coming ... Two-panel ; I usually have about 20 panels (10 each side) and the most attractive feature: every action works without touching the mouse - I'm very keyboard centric ;) But I will give tuxcmd a try. @Carl Johnson: I agree, but you might want to look into qalculate as a substitute. Ok, that's a really big calculator. But its no substitute for me. What I need most, is conversion between dec/hex/oct/binary - and that conversion is very handy with KCalc. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012131820.35086.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
Hello, John Hasler wrote: Geronimo writes: No, I refer to the kde settings dialog, where all desktop-settings can be changed. The same configuration page is accessible from the clock in the destop-bar. These are per-user settings, then? No - not at all. To change time-settings you'll need to authorize as superuser and the changes then will change system settings. I think, current time will never be a question of taste, so it makes no sense at all, having a per-user-timezone. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012140637.44215.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
Hello, Andrei Popescu wrote: The question is certainly in the installer, I checked the translation files (.po), but it is probably shown only on expert installs. Ok, I tried several installations, but the question about utc settings is not there. Not on normal installation, neither on expert installation. So I was fooled by my mind. I don't know, when it has disappeared. But, I believe, that hwclock interpretation as utc is unix/linux standard, so doing so without question would be fine. Breaking that standard should not happen without user notification. No matter whether in standard or expert mode. So I would appreciate a lot a message like The installer detected a windows installation. It is recommended to change hwclock to local settings. Would you like to change hwclock settings to local mode? - and then its up to the taste of the user. For me its the same question like the root account. As there is no professional ix-system without root account - its natural to have it on debian systems. Only systems like ubuntu consider the user as too stupid to give him a root account. So the habbit of silently break the standards may be ok for other linux systems, but not for debian. Therefor I vote for the utc-question before changing /etc/default/rcS to local. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012140651.53784.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
Hello, Andrei Popescu wrote: I would even settle for a Linux version if properly packaged for Debian. ... Given the reasonable one-time licence fee I would even consider buying it! Agree! If I remember well, tc is able to have several directory shortcuts in one panel too. So yes - would be fine. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012140658.53253.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
Hello, shawn wilson wrote: Gero wrote: What I need most, is conversion between dec/hex/oct/binary - and that conversion is very handy with KCalc. ... you mean like bc's hex(), oct(), dec(), bin() functions? I'm sorry. As I'm used to use vim and terminals - I have to confess, that I don't know bc. KCalc is foolproof - I don't need to read a manual to use it ;) yeah, a gui is just for keeping multiple consoles in one screen Agree :) But I have to confess, I'm quite lazy - so if I have the choice between a gui- app, that I can use without reading a single manual line and a cmdline-app, that does not show the basics I need at --help option ... guess what. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012140704.58691.geronimo...@arcor.de
weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
Hello, I have two separate installations of debian squeeze, each on a different harddisk. More by accident, than by intention it happens, that each installation has its own grub entry in the mbr of its harddisk. Both systems use ext3 and grub2 and hwclock runs at UTC. 1. On both installtions it is impossible to boot the other squeeze installation. First I have to enter BIOS and reorder the boot sequence of the harddisks to enable the start of the other grub - so each grub can boot systems on the same harddisk only! I'm sure, that was not the case with grub1 and hints on how to get a system from a different harddrive booted are very appreciated! 2. One squeeze installation is a gnome system (with some kde apps added) and the other system is a kde (with some gnome apps added). As mentioned, time is UTC based on both installations. When I reboot the gnome system and change BIOS to use kde system the initial filesystem check claims, that the last mount time from superblock is in future. When the kde is up and running - its time is wrong by one hour - and I could not achieve to set the time, that it is right after next reboot. So I had to install ntp to get right times on kde 3. gnome apps work better in kde-environment as kde-apps do in gnome environment. So using KMail it is not possible to add events or tasks and the overview will not show birthdays from addressbook. In gnome I miss the posibility to maximize windows in 1 direction only - depending on the mouse button used. So I currently try to checkout both worlds to find out, wich is best for me. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012130640.52508.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weired issues of debian squeeze (base system)
Hello, On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 06:58:56, shawn wilson wrote: On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Geronimo geronimo...@arcor.de wrote: first, some side comments that aren't going to answer your questions: why not use a vm? I already use virtualbox for testing. Few days after squeeze freeze I had a crash of my system disk and so I decided to start with squeeze. The point is - I was a very emotional fan of kde in days before kde 4 - but now I hate kde. But - as I use applications and not the desktop, I'm used to both gnome and kde apps. So I need to find out, which mixture is best for me. gnome is not ready yet to suit my needs, so I have to decide between change my way of working or use a desktop, which i hate and wich will waste lot of my time. 1. On both installtions it is impossible to boot the other squeeze installation. First I have to enter BIOS and reorder the boot sequence of the harddisks to enable the start of the other grub - so each grub can boot systems on the same harddisk only! I'm sure, that was not the case with grub1 and hints on how to get a system from a different harddrive booted are very appreciated! pick a grub install - doesn't matter which, just pick one. add the second hdd to the config so that it shows up on the menu. I tried grup-update on both systems and the menue-entries are already there. But selecting a menue-entry from another harddisk result in a boot failure: you need to start kernel first or similar. Doesn't update-grub perform all neccessary steps to enable the boot of found systems (from os-prober)? 2. One squeeze installation is a gnome system (with some kde apps added) and the other system is a kde (with some gnome apps added). As mentioned, time is UTC based on both installations. When I reboot the gnome system and change BIOS to use kde system the initial filesystem check claims, that the last mount time from superblock is in future. When the kde is up and running - its time is wrong by one hour - and I could not achieve to set the time, that it is right after next reboot. So I had to install ntp to get right times on kde no idea. i know this happens to my VMs when i put them to sleep and such, but i don't really care since they are for testing and i would never run time sensitive apps on a vm (time skew in vm is a known issue). Well, both systems run the same kernel and the same file system. I don't know, whether gnome or kde are involved yet at that early boot stage. I never have a time skew when I do a reboot and I never have the time skew when I boot from the kde-system to the gnome-system. This happens only when I change from the gnome-system to the kde-system. Additionally: I need some time to enter BIOS and reorder boot sequence of harddrives - so I suspect, that it's not a question of time skew but may be wrong handling of hwclock - as the kde-system comes up with a wrong time (wrong by one hour - not a few seconds). Is it possible, that kde-system use the windows style of hwclock interpretation? - I know this wrong time by one hour by having windows and linux on the same machine and the clock runs at UTC. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012130727.07454.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weird stuff about grub2
Hi, thank you for your attention! ON Tuesday 07 December 2010 12:01:26, Paul Cartwright (Paul Cartwright deb...@pcartwright.com) wrote: On 12/07/2010 01:34 AM, Geronimo wrote: The osprober added menue entries for the other systems found, but none of them is bootable. Selecting another item results in errors like: error: no such device xxx-uid-xxx error: no such partition error: you need to load kernel first sounds like grub was added to the wrong HD. Sounds like the OSes are on disk 0, but you added disk 1 put grub on disk one.. it can't find them on disk 1. Hm, both disks contain grub and both disks can boot their initial installed squeeze. So I don't get the problem. disk 0 has a partition with debian squeeze and grub added to the mbr. When I put disk 0 in first place of BIOS bootdrives, that grub is able to boot that debian. disk 1 has a partition with debian squeeze too and this time grub was added to the mbr of disk 1. So when I change the order of BIOS bootdrives and place disk 1 at first position - I can boot into the second debian squeeze installation. Both installations know about the other installation, so uid of all partitions is right on both systems - but none of the grub instances is able to boot the linux from the other drive. Which never was an issue with grub1 ;) kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012071657.59777.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: weird stuff about grub2
Hello, I have similar problems. I had a squeeze system where I added a new harddisk and installed a new variant of squeeze. Accidently the new installation added grub to the master boot record of the newly added harddisk. With the old grub it was no problem at all - I just had to run 'update-grub' and things where fine. Not now. The osprober added menue entries for the other systems found, but none of them is bootable. Selecting another item results in errors like: error: no such device xxx-uid-xxx error: no such partition error: you need to load kernel first So to boot one of the older OSses installed, I need to enter BIOS and change the boot order of the harddisks. That's really ugly! When I look at the disk with the claimed uid - it exists and the uid is right. So what can I do, to add the older OSses to the grub2 of the new installation? (I already tried update-grub - but did not change anything) kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012070734.37497.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: problems with grub2 and usb-keyboard
Hi Bob, first of all thank you for your attention. Bob Proulx wrote: It sounds like your BIOS is not supporting legacy usb devices. Boot to your BIOS setup page and look for an option that says something like Enable Legacy USB Devices. My BIOS was dated from this year and it had no option about Legacy USB Devices - only Legacy Storage Devices, which had been enabled already. In which case an update to the BIOS may be needed. I was pretty faithless about your hint. But ... ... I went to hell for that fu...nny BIOS update (without any M$-System and without floppy - no way :( I had to dig for my old floppy drive) and after update, I could not see any visual difference ... ... but - it works :) So thanks a lot for your hint! kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012050902.15984.geronimo...@arcor.de
Re: problems with grub2 and usb-keyboard
Bob Proulx wrote: Maybe one day all computers can use a free software BIOS that we can see and understand. http://www.coreboot.org/Welcome_to_coreboot Nice project. Although I love your idea, I believe, as long as MB-manufactors don't use that project - or at least support it, your idea will stay a dream. The list of supported MBs is too small and too old to have a chance to success. kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012060613.03234.geronimo...@arcor.de
problems with grub2 and usb-keyboard
Hi, I have some trouble with grub2 and usb-keyboard. The keyboard works with BIOS and after booting with X - but grub2 does not accept any keystroke. If I wonna change the boot device selection, I have to plug in a ps2 keyboard, which is quite a bit annoying. What can I do to get grub2 accept the keystrokes from usb-keyboard? kind regards Gero -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012020441.18803.geronimo...@arcor.de
squeeze dist-upgrade of 11/29/2010 broke typo3 installation
Hello, with the dist-upgrade of yesterday (11/29/2010) my typo3 installations don't work any more. Error from syslog is: PHP Warning: Unknown: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(/usr/local/share/typo3_src+dummy-4.4.4/index.php) is not within the allowed path(s): (...:/usr/local/share/typo3_src+dummy-4.4.4/:...) in Unknown on line 0 so apparently the open_basedir does not respekt the directory whitelist. I did some tests resulting in a failed stat of an existing file. That file has the apache-user as owner. I use typo3 with several virtual hosts and different installations, which all worked fine until the 11/28/2010. So any hint or workaround is appreciated. kind regards Geronimo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201011300723.21286.geronimo...@arcor.de
Nach (etch-)Neuinstallation funzt php nimmer
Hallo, ich habe den Tod einer Festplatte als Anlass genommen, meinen Server mal wieder von scratch (mit Etch) zu installieren. Im Großen und Ganzen bin ich recht zufrieden, wie easy alles geklappt hat. Bei den meisten Diensten brauchte ich nur meine gesicherte Konfiguration einspielen und es lief wie bisher. Sehr gut gefallen hat mir, dass man (jetzt ?) auch das Raid für ein root-FS bei der Installation konfigurieren kann :) Nur bei apache2 und php5 bekomme ich es nicht gebacken. Anfangs dachte ich, es liegt an dem fehlenden Link für php in mods-enabled - und habe diesen eingefügt. Jetzt wurde php wenigstens im Status mit angezeigt. Allerdings öffnet sich bei jeder php-Datei ein download-Fenster im Browser. Ok, dachte ich - vielleicht erkennt der apache noch net, dass er php anders behandeln soll ... und habe versuchsweise in der php5.conf die tags IfModule auskommentiert. Jetzt erkennt der apache zwar den Dateityp als PHP-Script, aber er schickt es immer noch als download. Wenn ich mich nicht irre, war bislang nur notwendig, bei apache2 das Paket libapache2-mod-php5 zu installieren. Danach lief es. Ich habe auch schon im bts gesucht - leider ohne Erfolg. Auch die Suche im Archiv der ML war nicht sonderlich ergiebig. ... by the way: In die Suchfunktion der ML scheint sich ein kleiner Käfer eingeschlichen zu haben, denn bei jedem Link bekommt man einen 404. Glücklicherweise läßt sich der Thread meist auch über die Datumsangabe finden, sodass man trotzdem weiter lesen kann. Für einen Tip, wie ich php5 und apache2 wieder zum Laufen bekomme (ohne den Weg über die Quelltext-Pakete) wäre ich sehr dankbar. mfG Gero
unsubscribe
Découvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails ! Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.mail.yahoo.com/ -- Pensez à lire la FAQ de la liste avant de poser une question : http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianFrench Pensez à rajouter le mot ``spam'' dans vos champs From et Reply-To: To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Probleme serveur X - carte graphique ATI
--- Sébastien [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : Apparement il te manque un module quelque part, soit le module du noyau (est-il bien chargé ?), soit le module idoine pour X (mais je pense pas, vu qu'il laisse des messages dans les logs). que donne ton lsmod ? Effectivement fglrx (composant du driver ati) n'apparait pas dans lsmod. Pourtant il est bien declare dans /etc/modules, je ne comprends pas ! Le pilote pour ton jeu de composants AGP est bien chargé (si tu utilises pas le support AGP interne au pilote ATI) ? Peux-tu preciser stp ? Geronimo Découvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails ! Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.mail.yahoo.com/ -- Pensez à lire la FAQ de la liste avant de poser une question : http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianFrench Pensez à rajouter le mot ``spam'' dans vos champs From et Reply-To: To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Probleme serveur X - carte graphique ATI
Bonjour Sur un PC Dell, carte graphique ATI Radeon X300 SE sous Debian: il semble y avoir un probleme avec le pilote de la carte (derniere version 8.8.25 sur ati.com) quand on ferme la session, le serveur X plante et on se retrouve avec un prompt login en mode texte au lieu de la fenetre habituelle. Il faut alors rebooter. D'autre part quand on n'est pas connecte, le serveur X plante tout seul au bout d'un moment (24h). Est-ce un probleme connu ? Y a-t-il une solution ? Ci-dessous le log de kdm apres un plantage (fermeture session - retour brutal en mode texte), et un extrait de celui de Xfree qui semble lie au pb. Merci pour toute suggestion G. - log kdm - SetClientVersion: 0 8 Could not init font path element /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Speedo/, removing from list! *** If unresolved symbols were reported above, they might not *** be the reason for the server aborting. Fatal server error: Caught signal 11. Server aborting When reporting a problem related to a server crash, please send the full server output, not just the last messages. This can be found in the log file /var/log/XFree86.0.log. Please report problems to [EMAIL PROTECTED] XFree86 Version 4.3.0.1 (Debian 4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 20041215174925 [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Release Date: 15 August 2003 X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0, Release 6.6 Build Operating System: Linux 2.4.26 i686 [ELF] Build Date: 15 December 2004 This version of XFree86 has been extensively modified by the Debian Project, and is not supported by the XFree86 Project, Inc., in any way. Bugs should be reported to the Debian Bug Tracking System; see URL: http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting . We strongly encourage the use of the reportbug package and command to ensure that bug reports contain as much useful information as possible. Before filing a bug report, you may want to consult the Debian X FAQ: XHTML version: file:///usr/share/doc/xfree86-common/FAQ.xhtml plain text version: file:///usr/share/doc/xfree86-common/FAQ.gz Module Loader present OS Kernel: Linux version 2.6.8-1-686-smp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-2)) #1 SMP Thu Nov 25 04:55:00 UTC 2004 Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. (==) Log file: /var/log/XFree86.0.log, Time: Mon Jan 31 11:49:55 2005 (==) Using config file: /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 Skipping /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libGLcore.a:m_debug_clip.o: No symbols found Skipping /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libGLcore.a:m_debug_norm.o: No symbols found Skipping /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libGLcore.a:m_debug_xform.o: No symbols found Skipping /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libGLcore.a:m_debug_vertex.o: No symbols found (WW) fglrx: No matching Device section for instance (BusID PCI:1:0:1) found FATAL: Module fglrx not found. [drm] failed to load kernel module fglrx (EE) fglrx(0): DRIScreenInit failed! Could not init font path element /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Speedo/, removing from list! SetClientVersion: 0 8 XFree86 Version 4.3.0.1 (Debian 4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 20041215174925 [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Release Date: 15 August 2003 X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0, Release 6.6 Build Operating System: Linux 2.4.26 i686 [ELF] Build Date: 15 December 2004 This version of XFree86 has been extensively modified by the Debian Project, and is not supported by the XFree86 Project, Inc., in any way. Bugs should be reported to the Debian Bug Tracking System; see URL: http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting . We strongly encourage the use of the reportbug package and command to ensure that bug reports contain as much useful information as possible. Before filing a bug report, you may want to consult the Debian X FAQ: XHTML version: file:///usr/share/doc/xfree86-common/FAQ.xhtml plain text version: file:///usr/share/doc/xfree86-common/FAQ.gz Module Loader present OS Kernel: Linux version 2.6.8-1-686-smp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-2)) #1 SMP Thu Nov 25 04:55:00 UTC 2004 Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. (==) Log file: /var/log/XFree86.0.log, Time: Mon Jan 31 12:17:50 2005 (==) Using config file: /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 Skipping /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libGLcore.a:m_debug_clip.o: No symbols found Skipping /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libGLcore.a:m_debug_norm.o: No symbols found Skipping /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libGLcore.a:m_debug_xform.o: No symbols found Skipping /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/extensions/libGLcore.a:m_debug_vertex.o: No symbols found (WW) fglrx: No matching Device section for instance (BusID PCI:1:0:1) found FATAL: Module fglrx not found. [drm] failed to
Re: dselect broke when updating to potato
On Sat, 18 Sep 1999, Marcin Owsiany wrote: The other day I updated my system from slink to potato, and now dselect and apt are broken. First off, if I go into dselect and choose Access, Update, or Install, it exits out to the shell with the error: dselect: unable to access method script `/usr/lib/dpkg//methods/charset/setup': Not a directory I fixed this problem. I looked in /usr/lib/dpkg/methods, and noticed everything in that directory was a directory except for charset, which was a text file. I moved it to /tmp, and then dselect started working again. So I guess a wrong file got installed at some point in the potato update. I just grepped in /var/lib/dpkg/info to try to find methods/charset, but didn't find anything, so I have no idea what package broke it. Ed
dselect broke when updating to potato
Hi, The other day I updated my system from slink to potato, and now dselect and apt are broken. First off, if I go into dselect and choose Access, Update, or Install, it exits out to the shell with the error: dselect: unable to access method script `/usr/lib/dpkg//methods/charset/setup': Not a directory The other dselect choices work. apt-get update works, however, apt-get install always says: 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 11 not upgraded. regardless of what I chose in dselect. I can't install or update anything with apt right now. I can still install packages with dpkg -i. I tried downloading a new version of the dpkg package a few minutes ago, however, it didn't make a difference. Any ideas how I can fix things? Ed
jdk broken in slink
Hi everyone, I had JDK working fine in Hamm, but when I upgraded to Slink, it broke. For starters, it looks in /usr/lib/jdk1.1/i586 for javac, but that directory is empy. I'm using a Pentium MMX. I eventually got it working by removing the i586 directory and making it a symlink to i686. Then, I had to add the i686 directory into /etc/ld.so.conf so that javac could find libjava.so. Right now javac is working and so is appletrunner. Will I run into any problems with this setup? And why didn't it work out of the box? I had this happen on a dual P90 (not even MMX) system as well. Why is it only installing i686 binaries? Ed --- Edward Di Geronimo Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Video games aren't like sex Lars -me yeah lars can get video games -Lars Holzman
RE: rpm to deb
Also, how come Netscape is distributed with RedHat and now Debian? Thanks. I thought RedHat had an agreement with Netscape that allows RedHat to distribute the software. I thought it was included because when Netscape made the software free, the new license allowed Linux distributions to include it. I think the only reason it wasn't included in Debian 2.0 was because it was already frozen when the license change went into effect. Ed --- Edward Di Geronimo Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Video games aren't like sex Lars -me yeah lars can get video games -Lars Holzman
