Re: /boot or not /boot (was Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc)
On Saturday 09 May 2009, Dale wrote: I was talking about with just a plain file system. I read in a install guide somewhere when I was installing ages ago that having /boot on a separate partition, and not always mounted, was a good security practice. That way no one could alter the kernel since it was not mounted. I do agree that if a person was on the system and able to get root access, they could them mount the /boot partition as well. I never was really sure why this was thought to work. I used a separate /boot because for a while I was dual booting Mandrake and Gentoo. Old habit now I guess. It's a suggestion for security against user errors; I'm pretty sure it was there long before genkernel came out, when there wasn't automation in kernel building. Furthermore you can use a non journalled filesystem for /boot. Ciao Francesco -- Linux Version 2.6.29-gentoo-r3, Compiled #2 SMP PREEMPT Sat May 9 18:15:29 CEST 2009 Two 1GHz AMD Athlon 64 Processors, 4GB RAM, 4018.42 Bogomips Total aemaeth
Re: /boot or not /boot (was Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc)
Francesco Talamona wrote: On Saturday 09 May 2009, Dale wrote: I was talking about with just a plain file system. I read in a install guide somewhere when I was installing ages ago that having /boot on a separate partition, and not always mounted, was a good security practice. That way no one could alter the kernel since it was not mounted. I do agree that if a person was on the system and able to get root access, they could them mount the /boot partition as well. I never was really sure why this was thought to work. I used a separate /boot because for a while I was dual booting Mandrake and Gentoo. Old habit now I guess. It's a suggestion for security against user errors; I'm pretty sure it was there long before genkernel came out, when there wasn't automation in kernel building. Furthermore you can use a non journalled filesystem for /boot. Ciao Francesco That's true about the file system. I think it was only recently, as in a couple years or so, that grub could read things like reiserfs and some other file systems. If it can't read it, it can't boot it either. After all, it has to read the config file on /boot for sure. I'm not sure about a user error tho. I always have mine mounted and I don't recall ever making a error. Of course, I always keep a couple extra kernels around just in case. I will most likely hold onto my 2.6.23 for a long while. It has been working REALLY well for me for quite some time now. I don't want to even start on 2.6.29. That could have been a gcc issue but it wasn't any fun. Dale :-) :-)
Re: /boot or not /boot (was Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc)
On 9 May 2009, at 16:23, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Saturday 09 May 2009 15:13:35 Stroller wrote: On 9 May 2009, at 13:41, Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Samstag, 9. Mai 2009 12:20:46 schrieb Stroller: This is Gentoo, so you as the user define the rules. And for _me_, it definitely _is_ a rule. Could you possibly explain why, please? Because it eliminates the need for an initramfs (which I used until a few weeks ago), ... I believed you could manage without either a /boot volume or an initramfs. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding. I think you are. The need for an initramfs has nothing to do with whether /boot is a separate partition of not. grub is equally happy loading the kernel from (hd0,0)/vmlinux or (hd0,0)/boot/vmlinux It has everything to do with making necessary kernel modules available at boot time. The kernel cannot load block device and filesystem drivers that are on the device it needs to read (chicken and egg). However, it can get them from a ram disk which is all an initrd is and which grub supports. Simply compile the drivers into the kernel. Indeed. So this seems an unnecessary rule to me. Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On 8 May 2009, at 21:58, Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Freitag, 8. Mai 2009 19:17:28 schrieb Daniel da Veiga: On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 14:04, Dirk Heinrichs dirk.heinri...@online.de wrote: Am Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 22:53:18 schrieb Alan McKinnon: Mirrored - no problem. But how else would you boot off a striped / with /boot not on a separate partition? /boot is _always_ a separate partition, isn't it? AFAIK, that's not a rule. Most people consider it the best option, but its definetly not a rule... This is Gentoo, so you as the user define the rules. And for _me_, it definitely _is_ a rule. Could you possibly explain why, please? Stroller.
/boot or not /boot (was Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc)
Am Samstag, 9. Mai 2009 12:20:46 schrieb Stroller: This is Gentoo, so you as the user define the rules. And for _me_, it definitely _is_ a rule. Could you possibly explain why, please? Because it eliminates the need for an initramfs (which I used until a few weeks ago), even if you've got your / on an encrypted logical volume. I simply put just enough userspace tools into /boot to be able to create the dmcrypt mapping and mount the real root fs, then run pivot_root and /sbin/init. So in the end it's the same than using an initramfs, but with less hassle. And for consistency reasons, I also use this scheme on every machine. Bye... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: /boot or not /boot (was Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc)
Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Samstag, 9. Mai 2009 12:20:46 schrieb Stroller: This is Gentoo, so you as the user define the rules. And for _me_, it definitely _is_ a rule. Could you possibly explain why, please? Because it eliminates the need for an initramfs (which I used until a few weeks ago), even if you've got your / on an encrypted logical volume. I simply put just enough userspace tools into /boot to be able to create the dmcrypt mapping and mount the real root fs, then run pivot_root and /sbin/init. So in the end it's the same than using an initramfs, but with less hassle. And for consistency reasons, I also use this scheme on every machine. Bye... Dirk Wasn't there a security reason for this setup at one time? If you put /boot on a separate partition, then the only time it needed to be mounted was to update the kernel or edit grub/lilo. That was what I was reading when I installed Gentoo oh so many ages ago. Is this still true? Dale :-) :-)
Re: /boot or not /boot (was Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc)
Am Samstag, 9. Mai 2009 14:46:39 schrieb Dale: Wasn't there a security reason for this setup at one time? If you put /boot on a separate partition, then the only time it needed to be mounted was to update the kernel or edit grub/lilo. That was what I was reading when I installed Gentoo oh so many ages ago. Is this still true? Of course, it needs to mounted rw for the few seconds needed to discover the LVs, ask the user for the passphrase and create the dmcrypt mapping. Then it's unmounted again and remounted ro during normal system boot. I don't consider this a security problem. If it was, I could also stop using Linux altogether, since there are also other filesystem on my system which need to be mounted rw if the system should do something useful. Bye... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: /boot or not /boot (was Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc)
On 9 May 2009, at 13:41, Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Samstag, 9. Mai 2009 12:20:46 schrieb Stroller: This is Gentoo, so you as the user define the rules. And for _me_, it definitely _is_ a rule. Could you possibly explain why, please? Because it eliminates the need for an initramfs (which I used until a few weeks ago), ... I believed you could manage without either a /boot volume or an initramfs. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding. Stroller.
Re: /boot or not /boot (was Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc)
Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Samstag, 9. Mai 2009 14:46:39 schrieb Dale: Wasn't there a security reason for this setup at one time? If you put /boot on a separate partition, then the only time it needed to be mounted was to update the kernel or edit grub/lilo. That was what I was reading when I installed Gentoo oh so many ages ago. Is this still true? Of course, it needs to mounted rw for the few seconds needed to discover the LVs, ask the user for the passphrase and create the dmcrypt mapping. Then it's unmounted again and remounted ro during normal system boot. I don't consider this a security problem. If it was, I could also stop using Linux altogether, since there are also other filesystem on my system which need to be mounted rw if the system should do something useful. Bye... Dirk I was talking about with just a plain file system. I read in a install guide somewhere when I was installing ages ago that having /boot on a separate partition, and not always mounted, was a good security practice. That way no one could alter the kernel since it was not mounted. I do agree that if a person was on the system and able to get root access, they could them mount the /boot partition as well. I never was really sure why this was thought to work. I used a separate /boot because for a while I was dual booting Mandrake and Gentoo. Old habit now I guess. Dale :-) :-)
Re: /boot or not /boot (was Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc)
On Saturday 09 May 2009 15:13:35 Stroller wrote: On 9 May 2009, at 13:41, Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Samstag, 9. Mai 2009 12:20:46 schrieb Stroller: This is Gentoo, so you as the user define the rules. And for _me_, it definitely _is_ a rule. Could you possibly explain why, please? Because it eliminates the need for an initramfs (which I used until a few weeks ago), ... I believed you could manage without either a /boot volume or an initramfs. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding. I think you are. The need for an initramfs has nothing to do with whether /boot is a separate partition of not. grub is equally happy loading the kernel from (hd0,0)/vmlinux or (hd0,0)/boot/vmlinux It has everything to do with making necessary kernel modules available at boot time. The kernel cannot load block device and filesystem drivers that are on the device it needs to read (chicken and egg). However, it can get them from a ram disk which is all an initrd is and which grub supports. Simply compile the drivers into the kernel. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: /boot or not /boot (was Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc)
On Sat, 09 May 2009 08:15:09 -0500, Dale wrote: I was talking about with just a plain file system. I read in a install guide somewhere when I was installing ages ago that having /boot on a separate partition, and not always mounted, was a good security practice. That way no one could alter the kernel since it was not mounted. That's a bit of a red herring IMO. If anyone can alter your kernel they can mount the filesystem. The argument about protecting the kernel from corruption is similarly spurious, since you always have a spare copy in /usr/src/linux anyway. The main reason for doing this was because some BIOSes could work past cylinder 1024 of a drive, so you needed to ensure the kernel was on a filesystem fully within that area. If it were a security issue, then the Gentoo handbook would have recommended this practice for all architectures, not just x86-based ones. -- Neil Bothwick If you don't pay your exorcist, you get repossessed. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: /boot or not /boot (was Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc)
Neil Bothwick wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 08:15:09 -0500, Dale wrote: I was talking about with just a plain file system. I read in a install guide somewhere when I was installing ages ago that having /boot on a separate partition, and not always mounted, was a good security practice. That way no one could alter the kernel since it was not mounted. That's a bit of a red herring IMO. If anyone can alter your kernel they can mount the filesystem. The argument about protecting the kernel from corruption is similarly spurious, since you always have a spare copy in /usr/src/linux anyway. The main reason for doing this was because some BIOSes could work past cylinder 1024 of a drive, so you needed to ensure the kernel was on a filesystem fully within that area. If it were a security issue, then the Gentoo handbook would have recommended this practice for all architectures, not just x86-based ones. That was my thoughts as well. You have to be root to get to the kernel and alter/copy it and if you are root, you can mount it anyway. No real point. I do get the old BIOSes tho. That was a issue for a good while. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
Am Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 22:53:18 schrieb Alan McKinnon: Mirrored - no problem. But how else would you boot off a striped / with /boot not on a separate partition? /boot is _always_ a separate partition, isn't it? Bye... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 14:04, Dirk Heinrichs dirk.heinri...@online.de wrote: Am Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 22:53:18 schrieb Alan McKinnon: Mirrored - no problem. But how else would you boot off a striped / with /boot not on a separate partition? /boot is _always_ a separate partition, isn't it? AFAIK, that's not a rule. Most people consider it the best option, but its definetly not a rule... -- Daniel da Veiga
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
Am Freitag, 8. Mai 2009 19:17:28 schrieb Daniel da Veiga: On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 14:04, Dirk Heinrichs dirk.heinri...@online.de wrote: Am Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 22:53:18 schrieb Alan McKinnon: Mirrored - no problem. But how else would you boot off a striped / with /boot not on a separate partition? /boot is _always_ a separate partition, isn't it? AFAIK, that's not a rule. Most people consider it the best option, but its definetly not a rule... This is Gentoo, so you as the user define the rules. And for _me_, it definitely _is_ a rule. Bye... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Fri, 8 May 2009 22:58:22 +0200, Dirk Heinrichs wrote: /boot is _always_ a separate partition, isn't it? AFAIK, that's not a rule. Most people consider it the best option, but its definetly not a rule... This is Gentoo, so you as the user define the rules. And for _me_, it definitely _is_ a rule. But that only applies to you, not always. I stopped using /boot partitions a few years ago and removed my last one earlier this year. -- Neil Bothwick If it's tourist season, why can't we shoot them? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
Am Freitag, 8. Mai 2009 23:12:22 schrieb Neil Bothwick: But that only applies to you, not always. Yes, of course it applies to me - always ;) I stopped using /boot partitions a few years ago and removed my last one earlier this year. Shame on you :) Bye... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
Am Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 21:51:55 schrieb maxim wexler: Still panics Sure, because of CONFIG_USB_[EOUW]HCI_HCD=m. If you want to boot from USB, kernel needs to have a means to access your USB device. Don't know if that matters, but I would also enable some/all sub-options of USB-Storage. HTH... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
Am Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 22:41:54 schrieb Masood Ahmed: maxim wexler bliss...@yahoo.com writes: Are you using an initrd? No, never used one on a gentoo box before. That's a fedora thing, isn't it? Nope! Its not distribution specific. It's a kernel feature. But it's up to the distribution to use it. Bye... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
I've never managed to successfully boot a gentoo laptop without initrd. On May 7, 2009, at 12:37 PM, Dirk Heinrichs dirk.heinri...@online.de wrote: Am Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 22:41:54 schrieb Masood Ahmed: maxim wexler bliss...@yahoo.com writes: Are you using an initrd? No, never used one on a gentoo box before. That's a fedora thing, isn't it? Nope! Its not distribution specific. It's a kernel feature. But it's up to the distribution to use it. Bye... Dirk
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
Am Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 18:48:15 schrieb Saphirus Sage: I've never managed to successfully boot a gentoo laptop without initrd. Then you're doing something wrong. I boot mine without, even with encrypted / on logical volume. Bye... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Thursday 07 May 2009 18:48:15 Saphirus Sage wrote: I've never managed to successfully boot a gentoo laptop without initrd. I've never managed to successfully boot a gentoo laptop with initrd. initrd's are there for the case where the distro builder does not know what the hardware is beforehand. Like binary distros - they must boot of almost anything so all modules must be detected and loaded at boot time. Gentoo, almost by definition, is used in cases where the builder does know what the hardware is - [s]he usually owns it. So you can dispense with initrd and simply compile in the modules required to boot. There's always exceptions of course - booting off a soft-raid volume, Sabayon, building one master copy of gentoo to use throughout your organization with a range of hardware. And of course there's always our very own elephant in the room - genkernel. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
Am Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 21:37:39 schrieb Alan McKinnon: There's always exceptions of course - booting off a soft-raid volume I doubt that :-) Bye... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Thursday 07 May 2009 22:46:59 Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 21:37:39 schrieb Alan McKinnon: There's always exceptions of course - booting off a soft-raid volume I doubt that :-) Mirrored - no problem. But how else would you boot off a striped / with /boot *not* on a separate partition? Or does grub understand linux raid these days? -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Donnerstag 07 Mai 2009, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Thursday 07 May 2009 22:46:59 Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 21:37:39 schrieb Alan McKinnon: There's always exceptions of course - booting off a soft-raid volume I doubt that :-) Mirrored - no problem. But how else would you boot off a striped / with /boot *not* on a separate partition? Or does grub understand linux raid these days? well, you just put boot on a seperate partition. is there any good reason not to do so?
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Thursday 07 May 2009 23:00:06 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: On Donnerstag 07 Mai 2009, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Thursday 07 May 2009 22:46:59 Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009 21:37:39 schrieb Alan McKinnon: There's always exceptions of course - booting off a soft-raid volume I doubt that :-) Mirrored - no problem. But how else would you boot off a striped / with /boot *not* on a separate partition? Or does grub understand linux raid these days? well, you just put boot on a seperate partition. is there any good reason not to do so? No, of course not :-) But I'm not talking about me. Wandering around the company I find it very common for inexperienced admins to install Red Hat on their servers with everything on one file system and both internal drives mirrored with Linux raid. I don't think that's especially clever. But Red Hat's installer lets you do it, and for that you need an initrd. Besides, we're talking about what's possible, whether it's good or bad isn't part of the topic. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Thu, 7 May 2009 23:16:27 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: But I'm not talking about me. Wandering around the company I find it very common for inexperienced admins to install Red Hat on their servers with everything on one file system and both internal drives mirrored with Linux raid. I don't think that's especially clever. But Red Hat's installer lets you do it, and for that you need an initrd. Not if they're RAID1, nor do you need a separate /boot. GRUB can load itself and the kernel from either of the disks and the kernel will then assemble the RAID, so you can pass root=/dev/md0 to the kernel -- Neil Bothwick If your VCR still flashes 12:00 - then Linux is not for you. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Thursday 07 May 2009 23:34:17 Neil Bothwick wrote: On Thu, 7 May 2009 23:16:27 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: But I'm not talking about me. Wandering around the company I find it very common for inexperienced admins to install Red Hat on their servers with everything on one file system and both internal drives mirrored with Linux raid. I don't think that's especially clever. But Red Hat's installer lets you do it, and for that you need an initrd. Not if they're RAID1, nor do you need a separate /boot. GRUB can load itself and the kernel from either of the disks and the kernel will then assemble the RAID, so you can pass root=/dev/md0 to the kernel Silly me. I said mirrored, I meant striped Ever since day 1, when I need to use those words or the RAID level numbers, I can't recall which is which. So, I usually get it wrong. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Tue, 5 May 2009 16:23:13 -0700 (PDT), maxim wexler wrote: grub.conf: default 0 timeout 10 title Gentoo root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/kernel root=/dev/sda2 # 'kernel /kernel' also works kernel /kernel is the correct setting when you have a separate /boot, the other only works because of the symlink in /boot. Although when you are so limited for storage space,, which waste it with an extra filesystem? I have root at /dev/sda1 on this Eee and no /boot filesystem. One thing I noticed when I setup grub is that the USB stick which holds the liveOS xubuntu is called /dev/sda and the SSHD /dev/sdb. Which I took into account: That's because the BIOS makes the boot drive the first disk. grub root (hd1,0) #which gives the appropriate response grub setup (hd1) #ditto But of course when I boot w/o the USB stick I go back to calling the drive (hd0). I assume that's correct because poking around on the command line when I get to the splash screen proves it. If I enter the command kernel / and hit tab it displays the contents of /boot just as it should. If I follow that with root=/ and then tab it says invalid string. Nevertheless I am convinced that /dev/sda2 is /. root=(hd0,1) also boots into a panic. On my desktop I don't even use the root= line and it boots fine. Do you mean the root grub line or the root= parameter for the kernel? The first should be (hd0,0) and that is working or you'd never load a kernel to panic. Have you fiddled with the boot order in the BIOS? That may be changing the numbering of the drives for the kernel. Have you tried using sdb2? What is the panic message? -- Neil Bothwick Good fortune will find you provided you left clear instructions. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 01:31, maxim wexler bliss...@yahoo.com wrote: You gotta use a delay (or wait, can't remember exactly) parameter for the kernel to wait while the disc is recognized, dunno exactly, but 2 to 5 seconds should be enough. I have an EEE 701 and Well there's a 10 sec 'timeout' but I can make that infinite by hitting the arrow key. That didn't help. And the 'pause' command, but that just waits for another keystroke. Are you talking about something that goes in the kernel line? Some sort of parameter or option that goes after root=/dev/sdn? Yeah, the kernel must wait for the root device to be ready, the root device on EEE is on a USB bus. Add rootwait to the kernel line. -- Daniel da Veiga
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Wed, 6 May 2009 10:46:15 -0300, Daniel da Veiga wrote: Yeah, the kernel must wait for the root device to be ready, the root device on EEE is on a USB bus. Add rootwait to the kernel line. Are you sure about that? On my 900, lshw shows sda and sdb to be ATA devices. Only sdc, the card slot, shows up under USB. -- Neil Bothwick Tagteam: A bunch of people thinking up taglines. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 11:03, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Wed, 6 May 2009 10:46:15 -0300, Daniel da Veiga wrote: Yeah, the kernel must wait for the root device to be ready, the root device on EEE is on a USB bus. Add rootwait to the kernel line. Are you sure about that? On my 900, lshw shows sda and sdb to be ATA devices. Only sdc, the card slot, shows up under USB. The SSDs are connected to Mini-PCIe slots (or soldered to them) and this slots have USB signals [1] so, they are on USB bus (AFAIK). The kernel takes a little time to detect and settle the bus to detect the devices. At least adding rootwait and rootdelay=10 to the kernel line solved my problems. I must say I'm getting this from nabble, since my EEE is running windows (I'm installing Gentoo on it this weekend). [1] http://tnkgrl.wordpress.com/2007/11/20/modding-the-asus-701-eee/ -- Daniel da Veiga
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
The kernel takes a little time to detect and settle the bus to detect the devices. At least adding rootwait and rootdelay=10 to the kernel line solved my problems. Tried rootwait by itself and with rootdelay=10 and rootdelay=10 by itself Well, the triple E still don't boot: either it sticks at ... Marking TSC unstable due to TSC halts in idle input: AT Translated Set 2 keyboard as /devices/platform/i8042/serio0/input/input4 Waiting for root device /dev/sda2... or it wait 10s and then panics: ... VFS: Cannot opent root device sda2 or unknown-block(0,0) Please append a correct root= boot option: here are the available partitions: #doesn't say what they are Kernel panic = not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(0,0) I removed all USB devices and the SD card with same result. mw __ Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 14:11, maxim wexler bliss...@yahoo.com wrote: The kernel takes a little time to detect and settle the bus to detect the devices. At least adding rootwait and rootdelay=10 to the kernel line solved my problems. Tried rootwait by itself and with rootdelay=10 and rootdelay=10 by itself Well, the triple E still don't boot: either it sticks at ... Marking TSC unstable due to TSC halts in idle input: AT Translated Set 2 keyboard as /devices/platform/i8042/serio0/input/input4 Waiting for root device /dev/sda2... or it wait 10s and then panics: ... VFS: Cannot opent root device sda2 or unknown-block(0,0) Please append a correct root= boot option: here are the available partitions: #doesn't say what they are Kernel panic = not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(0,0) I removed all USB devices and the SD card with same result. mw __ Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/ Well, it seems your kernel lacks support for the disks. Are you sure you compiled in all the necessary USB, SATA disk support? Are you using an initrd? -- Daniel da Veiga
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
Am Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2009 19:11:56 schrieb maxim wexler: VFS: Cannot opent root device sda2 or unknown-block(0,0) Please append a correct root= boot option: here are the available partitions:#doesn't say what they are Kernel panic = not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(0,0) The message means: I have no idea what sda2 is. Does your kernel have support for everything needed to boot compiled in? That is SCSI, USB, SCSI_DISK, USB_STORAGE,... Please post your kernel config. Bye... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 16:51, maxim wexler bliss...@yahoo.com wrote: Well, it seems your kernel lacks support for the disks. Are you sure you compiled in all the necessary USB, SATA disk support? Still panics chrooted, ran make menuconfig, make make modules_install and copied over the kernel three more times. Attached find the latest iteration of the config. Are you using an initrd? No, never used one on a gentoo box before. That's a fedora thing, isn't it? Just to be sure no needed modules would be missing. I use initrd on my Gentoo boxes, nothing wrong with it... Fedora thing?! That's a linux kernel thing (or maybe option), anyway, I'm lazy enough to use genkernel, lol. Don't you need SATA support for this drives to work? Seems yours is missing: # CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDE_SATA is not set # CONFIG_SATA_AHCI is not set # CONFIG_SATA_PMP is not se Not sure, anyway, try it... -- Daniel da Veiga
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
maxim wexler bliss...@yahoo.com writes: Are you using an initrd? No, never used one on a gentoo box before. That's a fedora thing, isn't it? Nope! Its not distribution specific. It's a kernel feature. Regards, Masood Ahmed -- Promptness is its own reward, if one lives by the clock instead of the sword.
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDE_SATA is not set deprecated, possible conflict but I set it anyway # CONFIG_SATA_AHCI is not set doubtful if I need it but set it anyway # CONFIG_SATA_PMP is not set definitely nothing to do with my system, didn't set it. Not sure, anyway, try it... Still panics! Same place, same message. Guess I'll try that initrd thing next. mw __ Connect with friends from any web browser - no download required. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA at http://ca.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 4:38 PM, maxim wexler bliss...@yahoo.com wrote: # CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDE_SATA is not set deprecated, possible conflict but I set it anyway # CONFIG_SATA_AHCI is not set doubtful if I need it but set it anyway # CONFIG_SATA_PMP is not set definitely nothing to do with my system, didn't set it. Not sure, anyway, try it... Still panics! Same place, same message. Guess I'll try that initrd thing next. If you're building all of your drivers into the kernel statically (=y/*) and not as modules (=m), then using an initrd will not help you in the least - it is only useful in a situation like this when you need additional modularized drivers loaded before the kernel will see your rootfs. How did you initially get your Gentoo install on there - what did you boot - CD or USB? You should be able to boot that medium again, then check to see what driver it is using for the drive controller. I'm sure there's a more direct way to do this, but here is how I can easily find the info: cd /sys/block ls -al (should show something like): total 0 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 May 6 16:48 . drwxr-xr-x 12 root root 0 Apr 22 10:49 .. lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 fd0 - ../devices/platform/floppy.0/block/fd0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 loop0 - ../devices/virtual/block/loop0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 loop1 - ../devices/virtual/block/loop1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 loop2 - ../devices/virtual/block/loop2 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 loop3 - ../devices/virtual/block/loop3 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 loop4 - ../devices/virtual/block/loop4 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 loop5 - ../devices/virtual/block/loop5 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 loop6 - ../devices/virtual/block/loop6 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 loop7 - ../devices/virtual/block/loop7 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram0 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram1 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram10 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram10 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram11 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram11 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram12 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram12 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram13 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram13 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram14 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram14 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram15 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram15 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram2 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram2 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram3 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram3 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram4 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram4 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram5 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram5 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram6 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram6 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram7 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram7 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram8 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram8 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 ram9 - ../devices/virtual/block/ram9 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 sda - ../devices/pci:00/:00:1f.2/host2/target2:0:0/2:0:0:0/block/sda lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 sdb - ../devices/pci:00/:00:1f.2/host3/target3:0:0/3:0:0:0/block/sdb lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 sdc - ../devices/pci:00/:00:1d.7/usb1/1-3/1-3:1.0/host83/target83:0:0/83:0:0:0/block/sdc lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:51 sr0 - ../devices/pci:00/:00:1f.1/host0/target0:0:0/0:0:0:0/block/sr0 Find your hard drive (let's use sda as the example here), and cd into the link up to the hostX part: cd ../devices/pci:00/:00:1f.2/ ls -al driver (should show something like) lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 May 6 16:49 driver - ../../../bus/pci/drivers/ata_piix From this I can tell that it is the ata_piix driver that is used for the controller that my sda disk is connected to. From there you can modify your kernel config to include the correct driver (compiled statically, I'd recommend, for your root device at least), and then you should be good to go. HTH- -James mw __ Connect with friends from any web browser - no download required. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA at http://ca.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php
[gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
Hi group, My 900A with a fresh gentoo install boots into a panic. Says it doesn't like my root=/dev/sda2 option. But that *is* the root partition. fstab: /dev/sda1 /boot ext2noauto,noatime 1 2 /dev/sda2 / ext3noatime0 1 almost exactly like the model in the quick-install guide which uses a swap partition for /dev/sda2 and calls /dev/sda3 /. grub.conf: default 0 timeout 10 title Gentoo root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/kernel root=/dev/sda2 # 'kernel /kernel' also works The disk SSHD is divided into two partitions, the first I mount at /boot is formatted ext2, the seconded I mount at / is formatted ext3. Drivers for both fs are include *in* the kernel. One thing I noticed when I setup grub is that the USB stick which holds the liveOS xubuntu is called /dev/sda and the SSHD /dev/sdb. Which I took into account: grub root (hd1,0) #which gives the appropriate response grub setup (hd1) #ditto But of course when I boot w/o the USB stick I go back to calling the drive (hd0). I assume that's correct because poking around on the command line when I get to the splash screen proves it. If I enter the command kernel / and hit tab it displays the contents of /boot just as it should. If I follow that with root=/ and then tab it says invalid string. Nevertheless I am convinced that /dev/sda2 is /. root=(hd0,1) also boots into a panic. On my desktop I don't even use the root= line and it boots fine. On the eeepc however that doesn't work. Can somebody tell what I'm doing wrong? Maxim __ Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 20:23, maxim wexler bliss...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi group, My 900A with a fresh gentoo install boots into a panic. Says it doesn't like my root=/dev/sda2 option. But that *is* the root partition. fstab: /dev/sda1 /boot ext2 noauto,noatime 1 2 /dev/sda2 / ext3 noatime 0 1 almost exactly like the model in the quick-install guide which uses a swap partition for /dev/sda2 and calls /dev/sda3 /. grub.conf: default 0 timeout 10 title Gentoo root (hd0,0) kernel /boot/kernel root=/dev/sda2 # 'kernel /kernel' also works The disk SSHD is divided into two partitions, the first I mount at /boot is formatted ext2, the seconded I mount at / is formatted ext3. Drivers for both fs are include *in* the kernel. One thing I noticed when I setup grub is that the USB stick which holds the liveOS xubuntu is called /dev/sda and the SSHD /dev/sdb. Which I took into account: grub root (hd1,0) #which gives the appropriate response grub setup (hd1) #ditto But of course when I boot w/o the USB stick I go back to calling the drive (hd0). I assume that's correct because poking around on the command line when I get to the splash screen proves it. If I enter the command kernel / and hit tab it displays You gotta use a delay (or wait, can't remember exactly) parameter for the kernel to wait while the disc is recognized, dunno exactly, but 2 to 5 seconds should be enough. I have an EEE 701 and had the same problem. -- Daniel da Veiga
Re: [gentoo-user] can't stop the panic on eeepc
You gotta use a delay (or wait, can't remember exactly) parameter for the kernel to wait while the disc is recognized, dunno exactly, but 2 to 5 seconds should be enough. I have an EEE 701 and Well there's a 10 sec 'timeout' but I can make that infinite by hitting the arrow key. That didn't help. And the 'pause' command, but that just waits for another keystroke. Are you talking about something that goes in the kernel line? Some sort of parameter or option that goes after root=/dev/sdn? __ Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! http://www.flickr.com/gift/
