Re: xorg-server failing on IBM NetVista with Intel 82815 video; was Re (6): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Sat,22.May.10, 00:55:34, David Jardine wrote: I see. All comments. Which is about the same as not having one. Hmm. Or is it? I'm as baffled as anyone alse by xorg configuration, but can't such a file, blank though it be, override some other config file? Just a thought. It's not impossible to have different logic for when the file exists, even if entirely commented out[1]. I can think of two ways to check this: - read the source - diff Xorg.0.log files from starting X with an empty (or completely commented out) xorg.conf and one with an xorg.conf specifying the same driver X would choose. [1] at least in shell scripts it's much easier to check for the existence of a file than parsing its contents Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: xorg-server failing on IBM NetVista with Intel 82815 video; was Re (6): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Sat, 22 May 2010 03:13:06 -0400 (EDT), Andrei Popescu wrote: On Sat,22.May.10, 00:55:34, David Jardine wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: I see. All comments. Which is about the same as not having one. Hmm. Or is it? I'm as baffled as anyone alse by xorg configuration, but can't such a file, blank though it be, override some other config file? Just a thought. It's not impossible to have different logic for when the file exists, even if entirely commented out[1]. I can think of two ways to check this: - read the source - diff Xorg.0.log files from starting X with an empty (or completely commented out) xorg.conf and one with an xorg.conf specifying the same driver X would choose. [1] at least in shell scripts it's much easier to check for the existence of a file than parsing its contents That's a good point. That's another thing he can try: erasing or renaming the /etc/X11/xorg.conf file. But I suspect he's already tried that. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/1270201588.348778.1274572124208.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: xorg-server failing on IBM NetVista with Intel 82815 video; was Re (6): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 05:29:18PM -0400, Stephen Powell wrote: On Wed, 19 May 2010 15:32:01 -0400 (EDT), Peter Easthope wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: Please post your /etc/X11/xorg.conf file as well. It contains only commented lines from previous experiments. Hasn't changed since the log was recorded. Should be visible here. http://carnot.pathology.ubc.ca/dalton.xorg.conf I see. All comments. Which is about the same as not having one. Hmm. Or is it? I'm as baffled as anyone alse by xorg configuration, but can't such a file, blank though it be, override some other config file? Just a thought. David -- 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/20100521225534.gb1...@gennes.augarten
Re: Re (5): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Tue, 18 May 2010 20:24:47 -0400 (EDT), Peter Easthope wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: ... my employer has [carnot.yi.org] blocked as a dating site. ?! yi.org provides an server for dynamically updated addresses. Among the thousands of clients, a few could be distributing colorful data. http://carnot.pathology.ubc.ca/dalton.Xorg.0.log is the same file. I registered at yi.org back when the ubc dns was failing. Sorry, Peter. I kept forgetting to check from home. I don't think the /dev/fb0 does not exist error is significant. It appears that the X server is set up to try the intel, vesa, and fb drivers, in that order. The message about /dev/fb0 does not exist would only matter if the fb driver was primary. But the intel driver successfully identifies your chipset as i815, one of its supported drivers; so that shouldn't be a problem. intel should take over as primary. Please post your /etc/X11/xorg.conf file as well. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/2131743565.266882.1274290353790.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
xorg-server failing on IBM NetVista with Intel 82815 video; was Re (6): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 13:32:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway Please post your /etc/X11/xorg.conf file as well. It contains only commented lines from previous experiments. Hasn't changed since the log was recorded. Should be visible here. http://carnot.pathology.ubc.ca/dalton.xorg.conf Regards, ... Peter E. -- Google pathology workshop. In ETHNO click here - Desktops.OpenDoc http://carnot.yi.org/. -- 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/171056499.51201.493...@cantor.invalid
Re: xorg-server failing on IBM NetVista with Intel 82815 video; was Re (6): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Wed, 19 May 2010 15:32:01 -0400 (EDT), Peter Easthope wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: Please post your /etc/X11/xorg.conf file as well. It contains only commented lines from previous experiments. Hasn't changed since the log was recorded. Should be visible here. http://carnot.pathology.ubc.ca/dalton.xorg.conf I see. All comments. Which is about the same as not having one. Hmm. Well, going back to an earlier post: On Tue, 11 May 2010 16:29:39 -0700, Peter Easthope wrote: dalton:/home/peter# startx ... (EE) open /dev/fb0: No such file or directory SELinux: Disabled on system, not enabling X server waiting for X server to shut down ... dalton:/home/peter# What puzzles me is the message, waiting for server to shut down. What caused that error? Did you do a Ctrl+Alt+Backspace to request a shutdown? Or did it shutdown automatically? If so, what caused the error? Was it the /dev/fb0: No such file or directory error? Or was it SELinux-related? I've never had any SELinux-related problems on my system. Just for grins, let's try an /etc/X11/xorg.conf file that looks like this: - Section Device Identifier Configured Video Device Driver intel EndSection Section Monitor Identifier Configured Monitor EndSection Section Screen Identifier Default Screen Device Configured Video Device Monitor Configured Monitor DefaultDepth16 Subsection Display Depth 16 Modes 1024x768 800x600 640x480 EndSubSection EndSection Section ServerLayout Identifier Default Layout Screen Default Screen EndSection - This forces it to use the intel driver or die. It won't try any other. And it gives it three standard resolutions to try. Maybe we can tweak it later, but let's see if it will at least display something. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/422028168.273101.1274304558003.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re (5): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 10:08:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway ... my employer has [carnot.yi.org] blocked as a dating site. ?! yi.org provides an server for dynamically updated addresses. Among the thousands of clients, a few could be distributing colorful data. http://carnot.pathology.ubc.ca/dalton.Xorg.0.log is the same file. I registered at yi.org back when the ubc dns was failing. ... Peter E. -- Google pathology workshop. In ETHNO click here - Desktops.OpenDoc http://carnot.yi.org/. -- 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/171056498.71215.313...@heaviside.invalid
Re: Re (4): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Sun, 16 May 2010 14:13:58 -0400 (EDT), Peter Easthope wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: Your kernel installation environment is not configured correctly for use with lilo. That's why you are having trouble upgrading to a newer kernel. Assuming that you are using only stock kernel images, here is what you should do ... The instructions are like clockwork. Thanks! Incorporation in the lilo package would be good. Well, I'm not one of the Debian package maintainers for lilo; so you'll have to take that request up with one of them. But strictly speaking, this is not a lilo issue. This is a kernel installation environment customization issue. This kind of customization is normally done by the Debian installer when you install the system. If you change boot loaders after installation, you have to re-customize this yourself. This is a little understood and poorly documented aspect of administering a Debian system. I've learned it by trial and error. I don't know if the new kernel will fix the X problem ... Unfortunately X remains broken with an error about /dev/fb0. The log is here in case anyone is interested. http://carnot.yi.org/dalton.Xorg.0.log I'll take a look at this this evening. I can't view it now because my employer has the site blocked as a dating site. ?! Whatever. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/1254151799.189348.1274105296464.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re (4): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 11:05:21 -0400 (EDT) Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway... wrote, Your kernel installation environment is not configured correctly for use with lilo. That's why you are having trouble upgrading to a newer kernel. Assuming that you are using only stock kernel images, here is what you should do: The instructions are like clockwork. Thanks! Incorporation in the lilo package would be good. I don't know if the new kernel will fix the X problem ... Unfortunately X remains broken with an error about /dev/fb0. The log is here in case anyone is interested. http://carnot.yi.org/dalton.Xorg.0.log With minimal understanding, I noticed these lines. (II) Primary Device is: PCI 0...@00:02:0 (WW) Falling back to old probe method for vesa (WW) Falling back to old probe method for fbdev (II) Loading sub module fbdevhw (II) LoadModule: fbdevhw (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/linux/libfbdevhw.so (II) Module fbdevhw: vendor=X.Org Foundation compiled for 1.7.6.901, module version = 0.0.2 ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 6.0 (EE) open /dev/fb0: No such file or directory I've tried various ideas found with Google. Remove the intel driver and leave the vesa driver installed for example. Is fb a standalone driver? Is it an accessory to the vesa driver? Thanks for any ideas, ... Peter E. -- Google pathology workshop. In ETHNO click here - Desktops.OpenDoc http://carnot.yi.org/. -- 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/171056496.45946.403...@heaviside.invalid
Re: Re (3): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Tue, 11 May 2010 19:29:39 -0400 (EDT), Peter Easthope wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: ... if it ain't broke, don't fix it ... I don't understand what problem you are trying to solve. But it is broke! In one sense, the primary problem is failure of X. dalton:/home/peter# uname -rv 2.6.30-2-686 #1 SMP Sat Sep 26 01:16:22 UTC 2009 dalton:/home/peter# startx ... (EE) open /dev/fb0: No such file or directory SELinux: Disabled on system, not enabling X server waiting for X server to shut down ... dalton:/home/peter# This problem is totally unrelated to which boot loader you use. A later kernel might fix the /dev/fb0 problem but currently the kernel update fails when update-initramfs invokes update-grub. So these options come to mind. * Wait for grub-pc to be fixed, put it back onto the NetVista, get the latest kernel and sooner or later get a working /dev/fb0. * Fix the update-initramfs script so that it works with lilo. That will allow kernel updating. * Compile a custom kernel so that a ramfs is not required. Again the kernel can be updated. * Reinstall Lenny and wait for grub-pc to be fixed before reinstalling Squeeze. The first option is quickest, provided it works. Thanks to anyone with a helpful idea, ... Peter E. Your kernel installation environment is not configured correctly for use with lilo. That's why you are having trouble upgrading to a newer kernel. Assuming that you are using only stock kernel images, here is what you should do: (1) Login as root. (2) Create a file called /usr/sbin/lilo-update. It should look like this: #!/bin/sh # # This script is referenced by /etc/kernel-img.conf. # lilo 2 (3) Mark the file executable chmod +x /usr/sbin/lilo-update (4) Edit the file /etc/kernel-img.conf. When you're done editing, it should look like this: # Kernel image management overrides # See kernel-img.conf(5) for details do_symlinks = yes relative_links = yes do_bootloader = yes do_bootfloppy = no do_initrd = yes link_in_boot = yes postinst_hook = lilo-update postrm_hook = lilo-update (5) Check the / directory for symlinks. If they are found, remove them rm /vmlinuz rm /initrd.img rm /vmlinuz.old rm /initrd.img.old (6) Check the /boot directory for symlinks. If they are not there, add them. cd /boot ln -s vmlinuz-2.6.30-2-686 vmlinuz ln -s initrd.img-2.6.30-2-686 initrd.img (I am assuming here that 2.6.30-2-686 is the only installed kernel.) (7) Edit /etc/lilo.conf. Make sure that the /boot directory appears in all of the symlinks. For example, # /etc/lilo.conf # # global options # append=acpi=off notsc clocksource=pit boot=/dev/hda compact default=Linux delay=40 install=text large-memory lba32 root=/dev/hda1 read-only vga=normal # # per-image options # image=/boot/vmlinuz label=Linux initrd=/boot/initrd.img # image=/boot/vmlinuz.old label=LinuxOld initrd=/boot/initrd.img.old optional Note the image and initrd lines (total of four). They specify a symlink in the /boot directory. Now install your new kernel. It should install just fine. I don't know if the new kernel will fix the X problem you are having, but that has nothing to do with which bootloader you use. As long as you use only stock kernel images and no custom-compiled kernel images, this should work just fine. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/1874972669.67550.1273676721208.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: Re (2): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Mon, 10 May 2010 17:42:25 -0400 (EDT), Peter Easthope wrote: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: What was the problem? In the text you quoted, there was no reasonable change that could be made to grub-pc to address the issue; Covered in several messages beginning here in debian-user. * Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 15:04:19 -0700 * Message-id: 171056446.61715.570...@cantor.invalid your /etc/kernel-img.conf needed fixing. With Lilo booting, yes. If grub-pc can be reinstalled, /etc/kernel-img.conf needn't change. Well, Peter, it's your system, and you can do with it whatever you wish, but to me it looks like you're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. I tend to have the if it ain't broke, don't fix it mentality. What advantage will it give you if you install grub-pc? Will your system run faster? Will it boot faster? Will it reach web sites that you can't reach if you boot with lilo? Of course not. Once the kernel and the initial RAM filesystem are loaded into memory, and control has been transferred to the kernel, the system boots and runs exactly the same, regardless of which boot loader loaded it. I don't understand what problem you are trying to solve. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/1852297399.28611.1273584573749.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re (3): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
From: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 09:29:33 -0400 (EDT) ... if it ain't broke, don't fix it ... I don't understand what problem you are trying to solve. But it is broke! In one sense, the primary problem is failure of X. dalton:/home/peter# uname -rv 2.6.30-2-686 #1 SMP Sat Sep 26 01:16:22 UTC 2009 dalton:/home/peter# startx ... (EE) open /dev/fb0: No such file or directory SELinux: Disabled on system, not enabling X server waiting for X server to shut down ... dalton:/home/peter# A later kernel might fix the /dev/fb0 problem but currently the kernel update fails when update-initramfs invokes update-grub. So these options come to mind. * Wait for grub-pc to be fixed, put it back onto the NetVista, get the latest kernel and sooner or later get a working /dev/fb0. * Fix the update-initramfs script so that it works with lilo. That will allow kernel updating. * Compile a custom kernel so that a ramfs is not required. Again the kernel can be updated. * Reinstall Lenny and wait for grub-pc to be fixed before reinstalling Squeeze. The first option is quickest, provided it works. Thanks to anyone with a helpful idea, ... Peter E. -- Google pathology workshop. In ETHNO click here - Desktops.OpenDoc http://carnot.yi.org/. -- 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/171056491.67431.624...@cantor.invalid
Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
Stephen, [update-grub] is not a bug. The maintainer script for the new kernel image package is trying to run update-grub because it is being told to do so by entries in /etc/kernel-img.conf. ... * Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:46:40 -0400 (EDT) * Subject: Re: why does linux image try to use grub ? I suggest that you look at Step 10: Customize the kernel installation process on the following web page: http://www.wowway.com/~zlinuxman/Kernel.htm. Thanks for the explanations and the excellent document about creating a custom kernel. If only more documentation were this complete and thorough. Past experience is that an intended straightforward repair can easily turn out to be a significant project. So my preference in this case is to reinstall Lenny on the IBM NetVista or to wait for grub-pc to be fixed. Without grub-pc installed, I can not read /usr/share/doc/grub-pc/NEWS* . Has anyone found that a problem with grub-pc from a few months back has been repaired? Has the time come to reinstall grub-pc? Thanks,... Peter E. -- Google pathology workshop. In ETHNO click here - Desktops.OpenDoc http://carnot.yi.org/;. -- 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/171056490.56898.466...@heaviside.invalid
Re: Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Monday 10 May 2010 15:57:02 peasth...@shaw.ca wrote: [update-grub] is not a bug. The maintainer script for the new kernel image package is trying to run update-grub because it is being told to do so by entries in /etc/kernel-img.conf. Past experience is that an intended straightforward repair can easily turn out to be a significant project. So my preference in this case is to reinstall Lenny on the IBM NetVista or to wait for grub-pc to be fixed. Without grub-pc installed, I can not read /usr/share/doc/grub-pc/NEWS* . Has anyone found that a problem with grub-pc from a few months back has been repaired? Has the time come to reinstall grub-pc? What was the problem? In the text you quoted, there was no reasonable change that could be made to grub-pc to address the issue; your /etc/kernel-img.conf needed fixing. I suppose a re-install might fix it, too. But, that seems inefficient compared to editing a text file. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re (2): Re^n: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
What was the problem? In the text you quoted, there was no reasonable change that could be made to grub-pc to address the issue; Covered in several messages beginning here in debian-user. * Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 15:04:19 -0700 * Message-id: 171056446.61715.570...@cantor.invalid your /etc/kernel-img.conf needed fixing. With Lilo booting, yes. If grub-pc can be reinstalled, /etc/kernel-img.conf needn't change. Thanks, ... Peter E. -- Google pathology workshop. In ETHNO click here - Desktops.OpenDoc http://carnot.yi.org/. -- 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/171056490.60057.585...@heaviside.invalid
Re: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:08:29 -0400 (EDT), John Hasler wrote: Stephen Powell writes: If there is a bug ... There clearly is. ... But as for it's operation, it is working as designed. Design errors are still bugs. Debian bug number 432025 may be of interest to you. This bug was opened on July 6, 2007, about 2.75 years ago. Obviously, nothing has been done. The OP didn't even get a reply. -- .''`. Stephen Powellzlinux...@wowway.com : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/1639512232.582031270143099512.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:04:19 -0400 (EDT), Peter E wrote: As described in discussion a few weeks back, Lilo is installed in place of Grub in Squeeze on the IBM NetVista 6578-RAU here. That's necessary for now. But then a system update runs update-initramfs which tries to run update-grub which is not there. I should be able to comment out the update-grub; and the assumption that grub is present should warrant a bug report. Any advice or comments? Hello again, Peter. This is not a bug. The maintainer script for the new kernel image package is trying to run update-grub because it is being told to do so by entries in /etc/kernel-img.conf. This file is classified as a configuration file, and therefore user modifications to it are preserved. The Debian installer put lines in that file for grub during installation. See another recent thread for another report of the same roblem: http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2010/03/msg02547.html Follow the Thread Next link for the solution. -- .''`. Stephen Powellzlinux...@wowway.com : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/404821493.289791270041949832.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:25:49 -0400 (EDT) Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:04:19 -0400 (EDT), Peter E wrote: As described in discussion a few weeks back, Lilo is installed in place of Grub in Squeeze on the IBM NetVista 6578-RAU here. That's necessary for now. But then a system update runs update-initramfs which tries to run update-grub which is not there. I should be able to comment out the update-grub; and the assumption that grub is present should warrant a bug report. Any advice or comments? Hello again, Peter. This is not a bug. The maintainer script for the new kernel image package is trying to run update-grub because it is being told to do so by entries in /etc/kernel-img.conf. This file is classified as a configuration file, and therefore user modifications to it are preserved. The Debian installer put lines in that file for grub during installation. See another recent thread for another report of the same roblem: except that I didn't modify it, so it should have been overwritten with a file which would have allowed lilo to run. I seem to remember being asked if I wanted config files overwritten when they are found to differ from what the package wants to install. Brian -- 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/20100331064850.5b742...@windy.deldotd.com
Re: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:48:50 -0400 (EDT), briand wrote: On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:25:49 -0400 (EDT), Stephen Powell wrote: This file is classified as a configuration file, and therefore user modifications to it are preserved. except that I didn't modify it, so it should have been overwritten with a file which would have allowed lilo to run. I seem to remember being asked if I wanted config files overwritten when they are found to differ from what the package wants to install. Two things are relevant here: (1) /etc/kernel-img.conf does not belong to *any* package. It is a *system-wide* configuration file that affects the installation of kernel image packages, but it does not belong to *any* package. Therefore, it cannot be *replaced* by installing a package. There is a package that is intended for use by those who wish to create their own custom kernel image packages. It is called kernel-package. And it contains a *sample file* in the format of /etc/kernel-img.conf. It is called /usr/share/doc/kernel-package/examples/sample.kernel-img.conf. But the sample file and the configuration file are two different things. Installing kernel-package will not replace /etc/kernel-img.conf. kernel-package also contains a man page for kernel-img.conf, but it only documents those options used by the maintainer scripts which get packaged with kernel image packages created by make-kpkg. There are other options which are used by the maintainer scripts that are packaged with official Debian stock kernels that are not documented in this man page. And most people don't have kernel-package installed anyway. Unless you're building your own custom kernels, you don't need it. (2) *You* didn't modify /etc/kernel-img.conf; but the *Debian installer*, on your behalf, *did* modify it during installation when it selected grub as the bootloader. Changing boot loaders after installation often requires manually editing this file. If there is a bug, it would be that there is no documentation for the official version of /etc/kernel-img.conf, or that /etc/kernel-img.conf does not belong to a package, or both. But as for it's operation, it is working as designed. -- .''`. Stephen Powellzlinux...@wowway.com : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/1640053366.306851270045382510.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
Stephen Powell writes: *You* didn't modify /etc/kernel-img.conf; but the *Debian installer*, on your behalf, *did* modify it during installation when it selected grub as the bootloader. Changing boot loaders after installation often requires manually editing this file. If there is a bug... There clearly is. But as for it's operation, it is working as designed. Design errors are still bugs. -- John Hasler -- 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/878w98o7f6@thumper.dhh.gt.org
Re (2): Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
Stephen, From: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:25:49 -0400 (EDT) http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2010/03/msg02547.html Follow the Thread Next link for the solution. Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:23:02 -0400 (EDT) If there is a bug, it would be that there is no documentation for the official version of /etc/kernel-img.conf, or that /etc/kernel-img.conf does not belong to a package, or both. Good of you to give the explanation and instructions in msg02584.html. My only remaining concern is that, with this being unfamiliar territory with several parameters to be adjusted, there appears to be a non-trivial risk of a small error leaving the system unbootable again. I'd hope that within weeks or months, Grub will work again on the NetVista. So an alternative plan is to simply watch for a hint that Grub is safe to try again. If I reinstall Grub and find that a problem still exists, reversion to Lilo is a known task. In any case, I've begun to learn about /etc/kernel-img.conf. Thanks again, ... Peter E. -- Google pathology workshop. In ETHNO click here - Desktops.OpenDoc http://carnot.yi.org;. -- 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/171056447.30597.264...@cantor.invalid
Re: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:08:29 -0400 (EDT), John Hasler wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: If there is a bug... There clearly is. But as for it's operation, it is working as designed. Design errors are still bugs. The main difference between a bug and a feature is that a feature is documented and a bug is not. So perhaps you are right. I can find no official documentation for /etc/kernel-img.conf as used by the maintainer scripts which ship with official Debian stock kernel image packages. There is some documentation for the version of /etc/kernel-img.conf which is used by the maintainer scripts which are packaged with kernel image packages created by make-kpkg in the kernel-package package, but that clearly doesn't apply here. As best as I can tell, kernel-package was at one time used by the Debian kernel team to create official Debian stock kernel image packages. But at some point in the past there was a parting of the ways, and the Debian kernel team started using other tools to create official Debian stock kernel image packages. What I learned about /etc/kernel-img.conf I learned from reading the man page that comes with the *Lenny* version of kernel-package. However, starting with the Squeeze version of kernel-package, there is a major philosophical departure from the past. The new philosophy of the maintainer scripts that are packaged with a kernel image package created by make-kpkg is that *no* post-installation tasks such as creating an initial RAM filesystem, updating the symlinks, or re-running the boot loader will be performed. If you want those things, you need to do them in a hook script. The maintainer scripts that ship with stock kernel image packages still support most of these options. Documentation for most of these options has been removed from the man page that ships with the Squeeze version of kernel-package. The closest thing to documentation for the Squeeze version of /etc/kernel-img.conf, as used by the maintainer scripts for official Debian stock kernel image packages, is the man page for kernel-img.conf that ships with the *Lenny* version of kernel-package. This is not a good situation, and it should be addressed. The problem is, against what package would you open a bug report, since the file does not belong to a package? The file is referenced by the maintainer scripts of *every* stock kernel image package for *every* architecture, as well as by some other packages, such as the update-initramfs script of initramfs-tools. (By the way, the fact that do_bootloader = yes is *not* honored for initial RAM filesystem *creation*, but *is* honored by an initial RAM filesystem *update*, may be a bug in the update-initramfs script of the initramfs-tools package.) -- .''`. Stephen Powellzlinux...@wowway.com : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/1602133228.337691270052318060.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:30:05 -0400 (EDT), Peter E. wrote: Good of you to give the explanation and instructions in msg02584.html. My only remaining concern is that, with this being unfamiliar territory with several parameters to be adjusted, there appears to be a non-trivial risk of a small error leaving the system unbootable again. Here is a link to an online version of the man page for kernel-img.conf that appears to be close to the available options supported by the maintainer scripts for *official stock Debian kernel image packages* under Squeeze/Sid. Note that many of these options no longer work for *kernel image packages created by make-kpkg* under Squeeze/Sid. I cannot guarantee its accuracy. For example, I don't know if do_bootfloppy = yes still works. I haven't tried it. http://www.wlug.org.nz/kernel-img.conf%285%29 To create an environment that works for both kinds of kernel image packages, I recommend that you customize /etc/kernel-img.conf as outlined in the other thread *and* create the hook script environment outlined in the web page mentioned in the other thread. The hook scripts seem to be necessary at the moment in order for lilo to get run during the installation of a new kernel image package. Whether that is a bug (unintended) or a feature (intended) I am not sure. But if you customize /etc/kernel-img.conf as recommended *and* set up the hook scripts as recommended, all your bases will be covered. As I see it, this whole problem started when the Debian kernel team decided to stop using kernel-package to create official Debian stock kernel images and started using other tools, which were initially based on kernel-package scripts, of course. Over time, they have slowly drifted apart, yet both groups of maintainer scripts still use /etc/kernel-img.conf as a configuration file. In other words, this is not a lilo-specific problem: this is a general kernel image maintainer script problem. To further muddy the waters, kernel upstream now offers a make deb-pkg option to create a Debian package directly from the kernel source package, without going through any Debian-specific tools. I have never used it. I have no idea if it uses /etc/kernel-img.conf, or if so, what options it supports. What a mess we have here! -- .''`. Stephen Powellzlinux...@wowway.com : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/518040484.375471270061331174.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Wed, Mar 31 2010, Stephen Powell wrote: On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:08:29 -0400 (EDT), John Hasler wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: If there is a bug... There clearly is. But as for it's operation, it is working as designed. Design errors are still bugs. The main difference between a bug and a feature is that a feature is documented and a bug is not. So perhaps you are right. I can find no official documentation for /etc/kernel-img.conf as used by the maintainer scripts which ship with official Debian stock kernel image packages. There is some documentation for the version of /etc/kernel-img.conf which is used by the maintainer scripts which are packaged with kernel image packages created by make-kpkg in the kernel-package package, but that clearly doesn't apply here. As best as I can tell, kernel-package was at one time used by the Debian kernel team to create official Debian stock kernel image packages. But at some point in the past there was a parting of the ways, and the Debian kernel team started using other tools to create official Debian stock kernel image packages. Arguably, at this point, they should have also stopped using /etc/kernel-img.conf (perhaps still parsing it as a fallbacK), and started using and documenting a _new_ file. If that had been done, with the postinst only reading /etc/kernel=img.conf when the new config file was not present, would have allowed for a graceful transition to the new, differently documented, configuration file. What I learned about /etc/kernel-img.conf I learned from reading the man page that comes with the *Lenny* version of kernel-package. However, starting with the Squeeze version of kernel-package, there is a major philosophical departure from the past. The new philosophy of the maintainer scripts that are packaged with a kernel image package created by make-kpkg is that *no* post-installation tasks such as creating an initial RAM filesystem, updating the symlinks, or re-running the boot loader will be performed. If you want those things, you need to do them in a hook script. The maintainer scripts that ship with stock kernel image packages still support most of these options. Documentation for most of these options has been removed from the man page that ships with the Squeeze version of kernel-package. The closest thing to documentation for the Squeeze version of /etc/kernel-img.conf, as used by the maintainer scripts for official Debian stock kernel image packages, is the man page for kernel-img.conf that ships with the *Lenny* version of kernel-package. This is not a good situation, and it should be addressed. The problem is, against what package would you open a bug report, since the file does not belong to a package? The file is referenced by the maintainer scripts of *every* stock kernel image package for *every* architecture, as well as by some other packages, such as the update-initramfs script of initramfs-tools. (By the way, the fact that do_bootloader = yes is *not* honored for initial RAM filesystem *creation*, but *is* honored by an initial RAM filesystem *update*, may be a bug in the update-initramfs script of the initramfs-tools package.) manoj -- The algorithm to do that is extremely nasty. You might want to mug someone with it. -- M. Devine, Computer Science 340 Manoj Srivastava sriva...@acm.org http://www.golden-gryphon.com/ 4096R/C5779A1C E37E 5EC5 2A01 DA25 AD20 05B6 CF48 9438 C577 9A1C -- 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/874ojwxms3@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com
Re: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:24:12 -0400 (EDT), Manoj Srivastava wrote: On Wed, Mar 31 2010, Stephen Powell wrote: As best as I can tell, kernel-package was at one time used by the Debian kernel team to create official Debian stock kernel image packages. But at some point in the past there was a parting of the ways, and the Debian kernel team started using other tools to create official Debian stock kernel image packages. Arguably, at this point, they should have also stopped using /etc/kernel-img.conf (perhaps still parsing it as a fallbacK), and started using and documenting a _new_ file. If that had been done, with the postinst only reading /etc/kernel=img.conf when the new config file was not present, would have allowed for a graceful transition to the new, differently documented, configuration file. I agree completely. Unfortunately, that was not done; and so we find ourselves in the middle of muddle today. But it's not too late. The kernel team could start doing that. And I believe that they should, especially since there are now substantial differences between the supported options in the config file for stock kernel image packages and kernel image packages created by kernel-package. You were using it first; so they should be the ones to change. (For those of you who do not recognize the name, this poster, Manoj Srivastava, is the author and Debian package maintainer for the kernel-package package, and is therefore the world's foremost authority on this subject.) Thanks for contributing, Manoj! -- .''`. Stephen Powellzlinux...@wowway.com : :' : `. `'` `- -- 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/2043334278.410951270071066954.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
As described in discussion a few weeks back, Lilo is installed in place of Grub in Squeeze on the IBM NetVista 6578-RAU here. That's necessary for now. But then a system update runs update-initramfs which tries to run update-grub which is not there. I should be able to comment out the update-grub; and the assumption that grub is present should warrant a bug report. Any advice or comments? Thanks, ... Peter E. -- Google pathology workshop. In ETHNO click here - Desktops.OpenDoc http://carnot.yi.org;. -- 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/171056446.61715.570...@cantor.invalid
Re: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
On 2010-03-30 17:04, peasth...@shaw.ca wrote: As described in discussion a few weeks back, Lilo is installed in place of Grub in Squeeze on the IBM NetVista 6578-RAU here. That's necessary for now. But then a system update runs update-initramfs which tries to run update-grub which is not there. I should be able to comment out the update-grub; and the assumption that grub is present should warrant a bug report. Any advice or comments? A work-around would be to compile your own kernel from the Debian source package, statically linking the modules that you need at boot time. That way, you don't need an initramfs. -- History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. Dwight Eisenhower -- 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/4bb295f7.3020...@cox.net
Re (2): Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
From: Ron Johnson ron.l.john...@cox.net Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 19:23:19 -0500 compile your own kernel from the Debian source package, statically linking the modules that you need at boot time. That way, you don't need an initramfs. OK, thanks. Depending on time available and when X is working again, I might do that. ... Peter E. -- Google pathology workshop. In ETHNO click here - Desktops.OpenDoc http://carnot.yi.org;. -- 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/171056446.73967.570...@cantor.invalid
Re: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum
As described in discussion a few weeks back, Lilo is installed in place of Grub in Squeeze on the IBM NetVista 6578-RAU here. That's necessary for now. But then a system update runs update-initramfs which tries to run update-grub which is not there. I should be able to comment out the update-grub; and the assumption that grub is present should warrant a bug report. http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2010/03/msg02584.html -- 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/l2l6d4219cc1003301954y7c1a4382je1f4ff16a0aaa...@mail.gmail.com
