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 > Gentoo > Gentoo User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-24-2008, 08:44 PM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default Grub heartbreaker

On Thursday 24 April 2008, darren kirby wrote:
> > Well, I had to put a lot more parameters for it to work -- I am not
> > using grub but my parameters aside from the ro are
> > init=/linuxrc ramdisk=8192 real_root=/dev/sda2 udev
> > and some more specific to me. *I am using something close to the
> > original gentoo configs, so it uses an initrd parameter also which
> > you need separately in grub.
>
> That would only apply if in fact the OP is using an initrd, which
> does not appear to be the case, though, the OP may have simply
> omitted this info.
>
> Rather, as Alan mentioned, it seems the problem is that the kernel
> doesn't agree that /dev/sda3 is the '/' filesystem. I have never used
> vmware, perhaps it fudges device paths in some way?

I read that snippet in the OPs post and didn't grok it's significance.
Regardless of the host hardware, VMWare gives you a virtual SCSI disk
in the guest, which will be sda3, When reader uses a LiveCD in the
guest it gives the correct results so his partition numbers are right.
To my knowledge SCSI has always been /dev/sd* so his config is
completely correct (assuming not using an initrd). Dunno, I'm stumped.

Reader, do you have an XP machine with VMWare where you could copy thr
vmware gust over to and try? If that succeeds I'd have to conclude it's
YANVO (yet another nefarious vista obstruction)

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 04-24-2008, 08:49 PM
 
Default Grub heartbreaker

Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thursday 24 April 2008, reader@newsguy.com wrote:
>
>> So assuming I've made some mistake in grub.conf I try to boot from
>> grub command line.
>>
>> root = (hd0,0) (which is /dev/sda1 in linux terms)
>>
>> kernel /kernel-2.6.25-r1
>
> Nope. Kernel needs a root=<device> parameter. It can't know what is your
> root partition, that info is in fstab and fstab is on the root
> partition.So you tell it via a parameter
>

[...]

>> kernel /kernel-2.6.25-r1 root=(hd0)/sda3
>>
>> Fails

> Won't work. (hd0) is a grub thing. You need a /dev/sda3 or similar in
> there

I think you are wrong about that. But just a fine point and not
central to the problem.
For example I know for sure you can use the grub notation at the
kernel address like:

kernel (hd0,0)/kernel-XXXXXX

At least I know for sure it was possible at one time.. I haven't
actully used that notation in grub for quite a while. I do have that
notation as the address for the splash image in several working
grub.confs. (like splashimage=(hd0,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz)


[...]

>
>> So reloading the install ISO I mount /mnt/gentoo/boot and edit
>> grub.conf to say:
>>
>> title=kernel-2.6.25-r1
>> root (hd0,0)
>> kernel /kernel-2.6.25-r1 root=/dev/sda3
>>
>> That fails
>> kernel /kernel-2.6.25-r1 root=/dev/hda3 (Thinking maybe grub
>> does not understand sda)
>
> Nothing to do with grub. It's a kernel boot parameter passed verbatim to
> the kernel and needs valid kernel device names.
>
> What's the error you get? Is (hd0,0) a separate /boot? Does it contain a
> file called kernel-2.6.25-r1 at the top level? And you also should have
> a "ro" kernel parameter in there

Using your point from above (but as I've posted, in the actual
grub.conf I do have a legitimate kernel device appended.

The latest attempt brings me to a grub command line as posted so
grub.conf didn't work.

So to give more meaning-full errors I will list my steps and the output
below including a screen shot of the kernel-panic error message

At grub prompt:

grub> root (hd0.0)
(That works and indicates an ext2fs)

grub> kernel /kernel-2.6.25-r1 root=/dev/sda3
(This also works as noted by using completion at `/k<tab>')

grub> boot

In the screen shot provided note that it appears grub is expecting an
intramfs and only lists those types of devices, rejecting both
(hd0,0) and /dev/sda3.

http://www.jtan.com/~reader/vu/disp.cgi

> here's a working grub.conf for illustration:
>
> default 0
> timeout 10
> splashimage=(hd0,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz
>
> title Default
> root (hd0,0)
> kernel /vmlinuz root=/dev/sda3 ro
>
> title Gentoo-2.6.25
> root (hd0,0)
> kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.25-gentoo root=/dev/sda3 ro
>
> Seems my setup is identical to yours:
> /boot on /dev/sda1 aka (hd0,0) to grub
> / on /dev/sda3
>
> Only difference is the "ro" boot parameter, which shouldn't make a
> difference - it's there for fsck purposes during start-up.


Yes, I fdisked the `virtual' disk into boot=/dev/sda1 root=/dev/sda3

> What disk driver and disks do you have? Are you 100% sure you are either
> using the new ata driver (everything is an sd) or have scsi/sata disks?
> If your disk is IDE with the old driver, it will be an hd and will
> require that on the kernel line

I'm not really sure about all this, its on a brand new gateway laptop
running Vista Home Premium on core 2 dua processor T5550

The system information tool doesn't give the type of harddisk but does
shwo goose eggs at a scsi listing... and its very unlikely to be scsi
anyway.

Device manager doesn't do any better. Under Disk drives it just gives
the brand (Western Digital) and the model number:
WDC WD2500BEVS-22USTO

I don't think that part number is a scsi part number.

I don't know any other ways to tell if its Sata or IDE but I think its
IDE.

I did mention in OP that this intall is inside a vmware machine hosted
on Vista Home Premium OS. The `virutal' disk is seen as scsi hence
the /dev/sda notations.

(Vmware workstation 6.5)
In the vmware harware settings its listed as 12 GB scsi disc.

My current grub.conf:

default 0
timeout 5
splashimage=(hd0,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz

title=kernel-2.6.25-r1-0x31a-1280x1024
root (hd0,0)
kernel /kernel-2.6.25-r1 root=/dev/sda3

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 04-24-2008, 09:09 PM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default Grub heartbreaker

On Thursday 24 April 2008, reader@newsguy.com wrote:
> Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:

> >> kernel /kernel-2.6.25-r1 root=(hd0)/sda3
> >>
> >> Fails
> >
> > Won't work. (hd0) is a grub thing. You need a /dev/sda3 or similar
> > in there
>
> I think you are wrong about that. But just a fine point and not
> central to the problem.
> For example I know for sure you can use the grub notation at the
> kernel address like:
>
> kernel (hd0,0)/kernel-XXXXXX
>
> At least I know for sure it was possible at one time.. I haven't
> actully used that notation in grub for quite a while. I do have that
> notation as the address for the splash image in several working
> grub.confs. (like splashimage=(hd0,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz)

To clarify, your kernel line will work just fine with that notation.
It's an instruction to grub in the form of a path that it understands.
Essentially you are telling grub which partition to look on for the
kernel and it knows what (hd0,0) is. /dev/sda1 won't work there, as
grub does not understand Linux kernel names (There might be a hack to
get around this but the code would be ugly as hell).

You have a "root" directive to grub, so the notation is
redundant. "root" is there so you don;t have to keep typing (hd0,0)
everywhere

<snip>

> In the screen shot provided note that it appears grub is expecting an
> intramfs and only lists those types of devices, rejecting both
> (hd0,0) and /dev/sda3.
>
> http://www.jtan.com/~reader/vu/disp.cgi

Aaaaaaaaaah, now I see. It's one of two things, and neither is your
grub.conf. That's the kernel spitting that garbage at you, so your
grub.conf is just fine. You have either:

1. Compiled in the need for an initrd and have not supplied one, or
2. (more likely) you do not have support for your chipset, ata and/or
root filesystem compiled into the kernel (NOT as modules). "VFS: Unable
to mount root fs" is almost invariable due to this

Do you want to use an initrd, or due the highly customized thing and
dispense with it?


--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 04-24-2008, 09:12 PM
"Don Jerman"
 
Default Grub heartbreaker

On 4/24/08, reader@newsguy.com <reader@newsguy.com> wrote:
> Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:
>
[...]
> In the screen shot provided note that it appears grub is expecting an
> intramfs and only lists those types of devices, rejecting both
> (hd0,0) and /dev/sda3.
>
> http://www.jtan.com/~reader/vu/disp.cgi
>

I think you're in kernel-land when you get those errors, and your
kernel is built to use an initrd which it doesn't find (because you
don't give it on the command line). I could be mistaken but that's
what I see there. Is there an initrd image in the root of the boot
partition (next to the kernel)? Try specifying that on the command
line.

Alternatively, check that your kernel is configured correctly for the
chipset that the vmware is emulating - it may just be missing the
vmware "hardware" and falling back to the non-existent initrd for more
drivers. You may need to compile another kernel to proceed, or build
an initrd with the missing drivers. (unfortunately I don't do vmware
so I don't know what it needs)
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 04-24-2008, 10:19 PM
 
Default Grub heartbreaker

Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:

> Aaaaaaaaaah, now I see. It's one of two things, and neither is your
> grub.conf. That's the kernel spitting that garbage at you, so your
> grub.conf is just fine. You have either:
>
> 1. Compiled in the need for an initrd and have not supplied one, or
> 2. (more likely) you do not have support for your chipset, ata and/or
> root filesystem compiled into the kernel (NOT as modules). "VFS: Unable
> to mount root fs" is almost invariable due to this
>
> Do you want to use an initrd, or due the highly customized thing and
> dispense with it?

OK, let me explain a bit. I started compiling a kernel for this
install and somehow missed something important for filesystems. (I
don't remember what now) during make menuconfig.

Rather than keep plugging away with menuconfig I ran `genkernel all'
which I have done many times. It always produces an intramfs but I
have simpley ignored and deleted from /boot. Went ahead with the
very same grub.conf as posted in this thread. (With different
devices), and never had any trouble with the kernel demanding an
intramfs. My take was that if you don't tell the OS to use an
intramfs in grub.conf then it doesn't... no harm no foul.

So maybe in version 2008.1 when one uses `genkernel all' something is
compiled into the kernel causing it to `need' an intramfs. If that
is the case it will be a new phenomena since I have, as stated, used
genkernel and ignored the resulting initramfs many times.

I guess a simple test would be to insert the intramfs options and see
if it works.

If so then I will redo the kernel with makemenuconfig and eventually
get a working kernel with no initramfs baloney.

> Reader, do you have an XP machine with VMWare where you could copy
> through
> vmware gust over to and try? If that succeeds I'd have to conclude
> it's
> YANVO (yet another nefarious vista obstruction)

I do and was hoping to avoid that very thing.. I too thought of that.
I can do it but it will mean horsing several GB across the network
then monkeying around with changed udev stuff that inevitably occurs
when you move a VM install. Then back across the network and more
udev stuff... I think I remember how to get by that but would rather
solve it in place.

For now I guess I'll test and see if adding initramfs to grub.conf works.

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 04-24-2008, 10:45 PM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default Grub heartbreaker

On Friday 25 April 2008, reader@newsguy.com wrote:
> Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:

> > Do you want to use an initrd, or due the highly customized thing
> > and dispense with it?
>
> OK, let me explain a bit. I started compiling a kernel for this
> install and somehow missed something important for filesystems. (I
> don't remember what now) during make menuconfig.
>
> Rather than keep plugging away with menuconfig I ran `genkernel all'
> which I have done many times. It always produces an intramfs but I
> have simpley ignored and deleted from /boot. Went ahead with the
> very same grub.conf as posted in this thread. (With different
> devices), and never had any trouble with the kernel demanding an
> intramfs. My take was that if you don't tell the OS to use an
> intramfs in grub.conf then it doesn't... no harm no foul.

I've hit that kind of thing a few times myself. Nowadays I just grit my
teeth and wait for a spare hour to run menuconfig and give it the
attention it deserves.

Something seems to have changed with 2.6.25, more so than normal for new
versions. For instance, b43 refuses point blank to work here or do
anything remotely useful like a nice driver should. b43legacy doesn't
work either. They both work with earlier versions although performance
sucks. I was hoping that this would be the version where I could dump
ndiswrapper. Maybe next time...

Let us know how you get on with a custom config

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 04-25-2008, 12:54 AM
 
Default Grub heartbreaker

Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:

> Something seems to have changed with 2.6.25, more so than normal for new
> versions. For instance, b43 refuses point blank to work here or do
> anything remotely useful like a nice driver should. b43legacy doesn't
> work either. They both work with earlier versions although performance
> sucks. I was hoping that this would be the version where I could dump
> ndiswrapper. Maybe next time...
>
> Let us know how you get on with a custom config

I haven't gotten that far yet, since I decided to try adding intramfs
lines to grub.conf and see if it would then work.... It didn't but
then I'm not really sure what is supposed to go there where you want
to boot off an initramfs.

I tried these lines I found by googling at site:gentoo.org:
(the part between the asterisks below)

default 0
timeout 5
splashimage=(hd0,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz


title=kernel-2.6.25-r1-0x31a-1280x1024
root (hd0,0)
## ******
kernel /kernel-2.6.25-r1 root=/dev/ram0 init=/linuxrc ramdisk=8192
real_root=/dev/sda3 udev
## ******

I was a little doubtful about `init=/linuxrc' since that appears to be
saying it initialize from a file at /boot/linuxrc. I don't have such
a file there, but all the examples I found seems to include that bit,
including in this thread.

At any rate it did not work and produced the same error as already
posted.

So, I'm thinking it probably won't do any real good to monkey around
with the kernel either, if the initramfs thing isn't the problem them
it seems likely to be a vista problem.

However you and others have mentioned having the right drivers for the
harddrive. How can I tell if I have the right drivers?

And are we talking about something in the vmware settings or do you mean
loading the right modules or building certain drivers into the kernel?

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 04-25-2008, 05:53 AM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default Grub heartbreaker

On Friday 25 April 2008, reader@newsguy.com wrote:
> So, I'm thinking it probably won't do any real good to monkey around
> with the kernel either, if the initramfs thing isn't the problem them
> it seems likely to be a vista problem.

The kernel is exactly where you should be monkeying. I reckon you have a
driver you need compiled in and it's a module because of the make
allconfig.

It's highly unlikely to be Vista unless Vista prevents VMWare from
creating virtual devices. This is unlikely. If it were, Microsoft would
already be in front of the anti-trust judge and /. would be going
ballistic

> However you and others have mentioned having the right drivers for
> the harddrive. *How can I tell if I have the right drivers?

Check the VMWare config for your virtual machine. Somewhere in there is
a choice for the disk type VMWare gives you. I forget the details, but
it's something well known. Same for the chipset stuff

> And are we talking about something in the vmware settings or do you
> mean loading the right modules or building certain drivers into the
> kernel?

It's the same process as building a kernel running on the native
machine. Without an initrd to provide drivers via a ram disk at
boot-time, you need them compiled into your kernel. It's the usual:

disk system type - in your case it will be scsi
specific disk/chipset type - this you get from VMWare's config dialog
root filesystem type - ext3/reiserfs/whatever you are using

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 04-25-2008, 10:01 PM
 
Default Grub heartbreaker

Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:

> The kernel is exactly where you should be monkeying. I reckon you have a
> driver you need compiled in and it's a module because of the make
> allconfig.

I went thru the makeconfig carefully. Even disallowing an early item
allowing intramfs boot, built a kernel .

But still get the exact same kernel panic looking like it wants an
intramfs.

I've started looking around on vmware forums and finding some
discussion and alleged fixes but the first one failed so far.

This is turning into a big time sink that I don't really have so I'll
probably just use cygwin stuff to get some unix tools onto vista.

But first, are you running gentoo in a vmware on vista?

It wasn't clear in the thread if you were or not... or maybe I missed
it.

If not Alan, is anyone here running gentoo as guest in a vmware on
vista?

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 04-25-2008, 10:26 PM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default Grub heartbreaker

On Saturday 26 April 2008, reader@newsguy.com wrote:
> This is turning into a big time sink that I don't really have so I'll
> probably just use cygwin stuff to get some unix tools onto vista.
>
> But first, are you running gentoo in a vmware on vista?

I was just starting to think you might be friend material. Then you go
and mention me and Vista in a positive sense in the same sentence. I
shall now have to send some of the lads around to your place with
baseball bats.

Just kidding :-)

Actually, I will no longer abide having Vista within 10 feet of me.
After this week's fight with OpenVPN on Vista I can rightly say I used
it once and I did see UAC in all it's fugliness. I shall even declare
to the boss next week that I simply do not and no longer will support
Vista in any form or fashion. Ever.

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 11:46 PM.

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