Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
On Thursday 04 November 2010, dhk wrote:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default setting seemed
reasonable and the build was easy enough. However, when I boot to it I
get a kernel
On 11/08/2010 05:28 AM, Coert Waagmeester wrote:
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
On Thursday 04 November 2010, dhk wrote:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default setting seemed
reasonable and the build was easy
dhk wrote:
On 11/08/2010 05:28 AM, Coert Waagmeester wrote:
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
On Thursday 04 November 2010, dhk wrote:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default setting seemed
reasonable and the build
On Monday 08 November 2010, dhk wrote:
On 11/08/2010 05:28 AM, Coert Waagmeester wrote:
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
On Thursday 04 November 2010, dhk wrote:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default
Coert Waagmeester wrote:
It has indeed happened to me with an IDE PATA disk.
Try first only to change only your grub config.
Then if you see that the kernel boots fine, you can change /etc/fstab.
If you want you can even use LABELs in fstab.
give your ext{2,3} partitions labels with e2label
On 8/11/2010, at 5:56pm, Dale wrote:
...
I have not been able to get grub to see the LABELS yet but I'm going to post
fstab so that you have a example that is known to work and not from a guide:
/dev/disk/by-label/boot/bootext2noatime1 2
Stroller wrote:
On 8/11/2010, at 5:56pm, Dale wrote:
...
I have not been able to get grub to see the LABELS yet but I'm going to post
fstab so that you have a example that is known to work and not from a guide:
/dev/disk/by-label/boot/bootext2noatime1 2
On 8/11/2010, at 9:34pm, Dale wrote:
...
Wouldn't happen to have LABELS in your grub.conf file would you?
Nope.
I believe this requires an initramfs - see the February 2009 thread, `Using
root=LABEL= in grub.conf` for more details of that. I seem to rather have
an aversion to
Stroller wrote:
On 8/11/2010, at 9:34pm, Dale wrote:
...
Wouldn't happen to have LABELS in your grub.conf file would you?
Nope.
I believe this requires an initramfs - see the February 2009 thread, `Using
root=LABEL= in grub.conf` for more details of that. I seem to rather have
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 15:34:08 -0600, Dale wrote:
Well, it does work since it booted as recent as last night when I
updated my kernel. I found that somewhere and just copied that to
mine. It may be the long way but it does work. I may edit it and try
it your way but since mine works and I
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 15:34:08 -0600, Dale wrote:
Well, it does work since it booted as recent as last night when I
updated my kernel. I found that somewhere and just copied that to
mine. It may be the long way but it does work. I may edit it and try
it your way but
On 8/11/2010, at 10:39pm, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 15:34:08 -0600, Dale wrote:
Well, it does work since it booted as recent as last night when I
updated my kernel. I found that somewhere and just copied that to
mine. It may be the long way but it does work. I may edit
On 11/04/2010 03:25 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 19:36 on Thursday 04 November 2010, dhk did
opine thusly:
On 11/04/2010 01:08 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 13:00:21 -0400, dhk wrote:
The reason I didn't include the exact error is that I can't
Apparently, though unproven, at 11:29 on Friday 05 November 2010, dhk did
opine thusly:
Is your / partition in or out of the lvm?
The / is out of lvm2 and is ext3, /boot is ext2.
Ok, that's the easiest way. Seeing inside lvm at boot-time is no fun.
But I think Niel spotted your real
On 11/04/2010 03:51 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 13:36:25 -0400, dhk wrote:
The ext2 wasn't compiled in, so I compiled it in and rebooted. I got
the same error.
kernel panic - not syncing : VFS: unable to mount root FS on
unknown-block (2,0)
It's saying unknown block,
Apparently, though unproven, at 11:47 on Friday 05 November 2010, dhk did
opine thusly:
On 11/04/2010 03:51 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 13:36:25 -0400, dhk wrote:
The ext2 wasn't compiled in, so I compiled it in and rebooted. I got
the same error.
kernel panic - not
On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 05:47:42 -0400, dhk wrote:
It's saying unknown block, not unknown fs. I suspect you haven't
compiled in the drivers for your hard disk controller.
All my hard disks are sata except the main one with the os on it that is
ide. Is a fairly new disk, may be a year
On 11/05/2010 06:33 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 05:47:42 -0400, dhk wrote:
It's saying unknown block, not unknown fs. I suspect you haven't
compiled in the drivers for your hard disk controller.
All my hard disks are sata except the main one with the os on it that is
On Thursday 04 November 2010, dhk wrote:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default setting seemed
reasonable and the build was easy enough. However, when I boot to it I
get a kernel panic and it complains about
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default setting seemed
reasonable and the build was easy enough. However, when I boot to it I
get a kernel panic and it complains about the root device /dev/hda3. So
I think the
dhk wrote:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default setting seemed
reasonable and the build was easy enough. However, when I boot to it I
get a kernel panic and it complains about the root device /dev/hda3. So
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:34 on Thursday 04 November 2010, dhk did
opine thusly:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default setting seemed
reasonable and the build was easy enough. However, when I boot
On 11/04/2010 12:52 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:34 on Thursday 04 November 2010, dhk did
opine thusly:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default setting seemed
reasonable and
On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 13:00:21 -0400, dhk wrote:
The reason I didn't include the exact error is that I can't capture it.
I'd have to write it on paper and then reboot to the working kernel.
Which is a lot less work than trying to fix the problem by guesswork.
--
Neil Bothwick
Velilind's
On 11/04/2010 01:08 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 13:00:21 -0400, dhk wrote:
The reason I didn't include the exact error is that I can't capture it.
I'd have to write it on paper and then reboot to the working kernel.
Which is a lot less work than trying to fix the problem
Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
dhk wrote:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default setting seemed
reasonable and the build was easy enough. However, when I boot to it I
get a kernel panic and it
On 11/04/2010 02:12 PM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
dhk wrote:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default setting seemed
reasonable and the build was easy enough. However,
dhk dhk...@optonline.net wrote:
On 11/04/2010 02:12 PM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
dhk wrote:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a manual one.
I think the kernel is alright since all the default setting seemed
reasonable
On Thursday 04 November 2010 11:49:07 pm dhk wrote:
stupid queston but did you select the appropriate sata drivers ?
i ran into a similar problem just about an hr back becuase i forgot to include
those .
--
- Yohan Pereira.
Apparently, though unproven, at 19:00 on Thursday 04 November 2010, dhk did
opine thusly:
On 11/04/2010 12:52 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:34 on Thursday 04 November 2010, dhk
did
opine thusly:
I've always used the genkernel, but now am trying to make a
Apparently, though unproven, at 19:36 on Thursday 04 November 2010, dhk did
opine thusly:
On 11/04/2010 01:08 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 13:00:21 -0400, dhk wrote:
The reason I didn't include the exact error is that I can't capture it.
I'd have to write it on paper
On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 13:36:25 -0400, dhk wrote:
The ext2 wasn't compiled in, so I compiled it in and rebooted. I got
the same error.
kernel panic - not syncing : VFS: unable to mount root FS on
unknown-block (2,0)
It's saying unknown block, not unknown fs. I suspect you haven't compiled
in
On 4/11/2010, at 5:36pm, dhk wrote:
...
This is what I had.
Second extended fs support │ │
│ │* Ext3 journalling file system support
│ │
│ │[ ] Default to 'data=ordered' in ext3
│ │
│ │[*] Ext3 extended attributes
│ │
│ │[*]
33 matches
Mail list logo
