FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-29-2009, 12:47 PM
David Baron
 
Default Best Keeps Getting Bigger

Built kernel 2.6.32.3. Get 2.6.32EBDA too big, overlaps lilo 2nd stage image
or something like that. This is a non-initrd kernel.

Do I have to go back to an initrd (stopped using it because of all those yaird
problems)?

Or is there a lilo parameter I can increase to make room?


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-29-2009, 02:06 PM
Stan Hoeppner
 
Default Best Keeps Getting Bigger

David Baron put forth on 12/29/2009 7:47 AM:
> Built kernel 2.6.32.3. Get 2.6.32EBDA too big, overlaps lilo 2nd stage image
> or something like that. This is a non-initrd kernel.
>
> Do I have to go back to an initrd (stopped using it because of all those yaird
> problems)?
>
> Or is there a lilo parameter I can increase to make room?

Hi David,

Just out of curiosity, what's the size of your kernel image file? I also use
lilo and no initrd. I'm using 2.6.31.1 with Lenny and have not run into any
boot problems yet.

-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.2M Dec 8 13:28 vmlinuz-2.6.31.1

--
Stan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-29-2009, 02:59 PM
Stephen Powell
 
Default Best Keeps Getting Bigger

On 2009-12-29 at15:47:41 +0200, David Baron wrote:
> Built kernel 2.6.32.3. Get 2.6.32EBDA too big, overlaps lilo 2nd stage image
> or something like that. This is a non-initrd kernel.
>
> Do I have to go back to an initrd (stopped using it because of all those yaird
> problems)?
>
> Or is there a lilo parameter I can increase to make room?

David,

First of all, according to some posts I have seen elsewhere, "EBDA too big"
messages often result when the kernel is updated but lilo is not run.
First try to boot your system from the old kernel (or a rescue CD, if need
be) and re-run lilo manually, just in case the install script for your
new kernel didn't run it. That may do the trick.

Secondly, there is a lilo option called "large-memory" that may help.
By default, lilo assumes that both the kernel and the initial RAM disk
must load below the 15M line. The "large-memory" option may allow the
kernel to load above the 16M line. I know it works for the initial RAM
disk. I'm not sure if it works for the kernel itself. The option is
not enabled by default because older BIOSes don't support it. If your
BIOS date is 2001 or newer, it will probably work. Also, lilo itself must
be new enough to support the "large-memory" option. The man page for
lilo.conf should tell you that. See if the option is documented there.
If all the conditions for support are there, add the "large-memory"
option to /etc/lilo.conf and rerun lilo (as root, of course). Then try
to boot your new kernel again.

Regards,
Steve


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-29-2009, 03:35 PM
David Baron
 
Default Best Keeps Getting Bigger

On Tuesday 29 December 2009 18:12:37 debian-user-digest-
request@lists.debian.org wrote:
> > Built kernel 2.6.32.3. Get 2.6.32EBDA too big, overlaps lilo 2nd stage
> > image or something like that. This is a non-initrd kernel.
> >
> > Do I have to go back to an initrd (stopped using it because of all those
> > yaird problems)?
> >
> > Or is there a lilo parameter I can increase to make room?
>
> Hi David,
>
> Just out of curiosity, what's the size of your kernel image file? I also
> use lilo and no initrd. I'm using 2.6.31.1 with Lenny and have not run
> into any boot problems yet.
>
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12781374 Oct 29 18:11 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-
davidb_2.6.31-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12785544 Nov 16 22:14 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-
davidb-svn14611_2.6.31-davidb-svn14611-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12870190 Oct 28 19:29 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-rt-
davidb_2.6.31-rt-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13104356 Dec 27 21:23 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32.1-
davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13109468 Dec 28 19:41 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32-
davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb

The last one is the 2.6.32.3 image. Simply note the progression :-)
The 2.6.31.1 (first one) is much much smaller.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-29-2009, 04:14 PM
Dave Witbrodt
 
Default Best Keeps Getting Bigger

Just out of curiosity, what's the size of your kernel image file? I also
use lilo and no initrd. I'm using 2.6.31.1 with Lenny and have not run
into any boot problems yet.


-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12781374 Oct 29 18:11 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-
davidb_2.6.31-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12785544 Nov 16 22:14 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-
davidb-svn14611_2.6.31-davidb-svn14611-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12870190 Oct 28 19:29 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-rt-
davidb_2.6.31-rt-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13104356 Dec 27 21:23 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32.1-
davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13109468 Dec 28 19:41 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32-
davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb

The last one is the 2.6.32.3 image. Simply note the progression :-)
The 2.6.31.1 (first one) is much much smaller.


You were not asked for the size of the DEB files, but for the size of
the kernel binary image. Like so:


$ ls -lA /boot/vmlinuz*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2340800 Dec 18 23:34 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2992976 Dec 20 10:44
/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32.2-0git091220+k10temp+f71889fg.desktop.uvesafb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3232736 Dec 22 21:12
/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32.2-0git+k10temp+f71889fg+r600fix.091222.desktop.kms



Note that most of the space suggested by the size of your DEB files is
taken up in the initrd images and in the modules directories:


$ ls -lA /boot/init*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7424984 Dec 26 17:14 /boot/initrd.img-2.6.32
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7427240 Dec 26 17:09 /boot/initrd.img-2.6.32.bak

$ du -s /lib/modules/2.6.32*
91452 /lib/modules/2.6.32
3948 /lib/modules/2.6.32.2-0git091220+k10temp+f71889fg.desktop.uvesafb
2708 /lib/modules/2.6.32.2-0git+k10temp+f71889fg+r600fix.091222.desktop.kms


HTH,
Dave W.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-29-2009, 04:35 PM
David Baron
 
Default Best Keeps Getting Bigger

On Tuesday 29 December 2009 19:14:39 Dave Witbrodt wrote:
> >> Just out of curiosity, what's the size of your kernel image file? I
> >> also use lilo and no initrd. I'm using 2.6.31.1 with Lenny and have not
> >> run into any boot problems yet.
> >
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12781374 Oct 29 18:11 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-
> > davidb_2.6.31-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12785544 Nov 16 22:14 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-
> > davidb-svn14611_2.6.31-davidb-svn14611-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12870190 Oct 28 19:29
> > /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-rt-
> > davidb_2.6.31-rt-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13104356 Dec 27 21:23
> > /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32.1- davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13109468 Dec 28 19:41 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32-
> > davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> >
> > The last one is the 2.6.32.3 image. Simply note the progression :-)
> > The 2.6.31.1 (first one) is much much smaller.
>
> You were not asked for the size of the DEB files, but for the size of
> the kernel binary image. Like so:

Same progression.

-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1939120 Nov 16 22:10 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.31-davidb-
svn14611
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1956720 Oct 28 19:26 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.31-rt-davidb
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1992432 Dec 8 22:27 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32-davidb


These ALL boot. The 2.6.32 above is 2.6.32.1

Reinstalling the 2.6.32.3 deb gives me:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1992752 Dec 28 19:38 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32-davidb

A relatively small increase but increase never-the-less. Enough to tip it
over.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-29-2009, 04:54 PM
Stan Hoeppner
 
Default Best Keeps Getting Bigger

David Baron put forth on 12/29/2009 10:35 AM:

> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12781374 Oct 29 18:11 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-
> davidb_2.6.31-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12785544 Nov 16 22:14 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-
> davidb-svn14611_2.6.31-davidb-svn14611-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12870190 Oct 28 19:29 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-rt-
> davidb_2.6.31-rt-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13104356 Dec 27 21:23 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32.1-
> davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13109468 Dec 28 19:41 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32-
> davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
>
> The last one is the 2.6.32.3 image. Simply note the progression :-)
> The 2.6.31.1 (first one) is much much smaller.

12.2 MB vs 12.5 MB? "much much smaller"? Why do you consider 300 KB to be
"much much smaller"?

My kernel.deb is 1.5 MB and my vmlinuz is 1.2 MB. _That_ is "much much
smaller". I've only done custom kernels on 32bit x86 headless server
platforms, so maybe mine would double in size if I were doing X86-84 kernels due
to 8 byte instruction words vs 4 byte words, and triple in size if I was doing
desktops/laptops. Still, my kernel would only be 3-4.5 MB. How is yours in the
13MB range? Kitchen sink in there too?

--
Stan



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-29-2009, 08:20 PM
Celejar
 
Default Best Keeps Getting Bigger

On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 11:54:36 -0600
Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com> wrote:

> David Baron put forth on 12/29/2009 10:35 AM:
>
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12781374 Oct 29 18:11 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-
> > davidb_2.6.31-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12785544 Nov 16 22:14 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-
> > davidb-svn14611_2.6.31-davidb-svn14611-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12870190 Oct 28 19:29 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.31-rt-
> > davidb_2.6.31-rt-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13104356 Dec 27 21:23 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32.1-
> > davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13109468 Dec 28 19:41 /usr/src/linux-image-2.6.32-
> > davidb_2.6.32-davidb-10.00.Custom_i386.deb
> >
> > The last one is the 2.6.32.3 image. Simply note the progression :-)
> > The 2.6.31.1 (first one) is much much smaller.
>
> 12.2 MB vs 12.5 MB? "much much smaller"? Why do you consider 300 KB to be
> "much much smaller"?
>
> My kernel.deb is 1.5 MB and my vmlinuz is 1.2 MB. _That_ is "much much
> smaller". I've only done custom kernels on 32bit x86 headless server
> platforms, so maybe mine would double in size if I were doing X86-84 kernels due
> to 8 byte instruction words vs 4 byte words, and triple in size if I was doing
> desktops/laptops. Still, my kernel would only be 3-4.5 MB. How is yours in the
> 13MB range? Kitchen sink in there too?

My current 2.6.32 laptop kernel:

-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1439312 Dec 3 16:44 vmlinuz-2.6.32-lizzie

This is a pretty full featured config, for normal laptop use (e.g.,
includes webcam support (gspca), bluetooth, Intel graphics, iptables,
etc.). OTOH, I prune very aggressively, and take out anything that I
don't actually need.

Celejar
--
foffl.sourceforge.net - Feeds OFFLine, an offline RSS/Atom aggregator
mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email
ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-30-2009, 12:45 PM
David Baron
 
Default Best Keeps Getting Bigger

On Tuesday 29 December 2009 23:21:21 debian-user-digest-
request@lists.debian.org wrote:
> 12.2 MB vs 12.5 MB? "much much smaller"? Why do you consider 300 KB to be
> "much much smaller"?
>
> My kernel.deb is 1.5 MB and my vmlinuz is 1.2 MB. That is "much much
> smaller". I've only done custom kernels on 32bit x86 headless server
> platforms, so maybe mine would double in size if I were doing X86-84
> kernels due to 8 byte instruction words vs 4 byte words, and triple in
> size if I was doing desktops/laptops. Still, my kernel would only be
> 3-4.5 MB. How is yours in the 13MB range? Kitchen sink in there too?
>

Probably is because I do not know what is safe to set to "no". These are
basically stock kernels with whatever would have been in the initrd compiled
in instead. The debs are full of modules, most of which simply take up space.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-30-2009, 01:15 PM
John Hasler
 
Default Best Keeps Getting Bigger

David Baron writes:
> Probably is because I do not know what is safe to set to "no". These
> are basically stock kernels with whatever would have been in the
> initrd compiled in instead.

Then why not use the initrd?
--
John Hasler


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:33 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org