|
Home > Archive > Linux Debian support > March 2006 > [newbie to debian] Need HELP with lilo!
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
[newbie to debian] Need HELP with lilo!
|
|
| Paulo da Silva 2006-03-21, 2:54 am |
| Hi!
package: lilo
version: any (last tested from last "testing" CD netinst image)
Debian: "testing"
I have tried to use lilo for booting from different ways without
any success. The symptoms are always the same.
Ways I tried:
1. Installing the system manually via debootstrap, etc ...
Then used aptitude to install lilo.
2. Normal netinst
Then used apt-get install or aptitude to install lilo.
GRUB worked fine.
3. expert mode install asking (last step) for lilo installation instead
of grub.
4. Used lilo from another system creating an entry for the debian system
in /etc/lilo.conf (included initrd.img).
5. Installed a new kernel-image.
Symptom (for all previous atempts):
The image of the kernel seems to be correctly loaded but
ends up repeating 4 or 5 times (cannot remember exactly) the following
message:
request-module: runaway loop modprobe binfmt-464c
Any help?
| |
| Bill Marcum 2006-03-21, 2:54 am |
| On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 01:34:50 +0000, Paulo da Silva
<psXdaXsilva@esotericaX.ptX> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> package: lilo
> version: any (last tested from last "testing" CD netinst image)
> Debian: "testing"
>
> I have tried to use lilo for booting from different ways without
> any success. The symptoms are always the same.
>
> Ways I tried:
>
> 1. Installing the system manually via debootstrap, etc ...
> Then used aptitude to install lilo.
>
> 2. Normal netinst
> Then used apt-get install or aptitude to install lilo.
> GRUB worked fine.
>
Why are you trying to install lilo if grub works?
--
Term, holidays, term, holidays, till we leave school, and then work, work,
work till we die.
-- C.S. Lewis
| |
| Paulo da Silva 2006-03-21, 2:54 am |
| Bill Marcum wrote:
....
>
> Why are you trying to install lilo if grub works?
Because I always used lilo. I am currently using lilo
and I don't feel comfortable to migrate
to a distribution that does not
boot with lilo (!) without understanding why.
I don't want to change my running systems.
Besides, when you install lilo, it says everything
went fine! But does not work ...
The question should be "Why not using lilo?".
| |
| Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) 2006-03-21, 2:54 am |
| On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 01:34:50 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:
> Hi!
>
> package: lilo
> version: any (last tested from last "testing" CD netinst image) Debian:
> "testing"
>
> I have tried to use lilo for booting from different ways without any
> success. The symptoms are always the same.
> [...]
I'm using lilo to boot up without any problems. The thing is, I compiled
the kernel from source and installed it (and its modules). I'm not using
the debian kernel image.
I installed the kernel-source-2.4.27, copied it to my home directory, read
the README.* files in the kernel source directory and compiled and
installed the kernel the traditional linux way.
Then I configured /etc/lilo.conf with information about my new kernel's
location and ran lilo.
I come from Slackware where things are more often done the "core linux way."
| |
| Paulo da Silva 2006-03-21, 2:54 am |
| Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 01:34:50 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:
....
> I installed the kernel-source-2.4.27, copied it to my home directory, read
> the README.* files in the kernel source directory and compiled and
> installed the kernel the traditional linux way.
>
> Then I configured /etc/lilo.conf with information about my new kernel's
> location and ran lilo.
>
> I come from Slackware where things are more often done the "core linux way."
I am currently running gentoo. I also used to compile the kernel that
way.
The reason I am trying another distribution is the time consuming to
compile the programs. gentoo is an excelent distribution and, being
compiled locally, very performant. But it takes to much time for
simple upgrades.
Anyway, I am trying also to compile the sources but using the debian way
as reported in
http://www.falkotimme.com/howtos/de...nel2.6_compile/
BTW, how did you manage the initrd stuff? Did you just skip it?
| |
| Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) 2006-03-21, 2:54 am |
| On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:21:59 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:
> [...]
> The reason I am trying another distribution is the time consuming to
> compile the programs. gentoo is an excelent distribution and, being
> compiled locally, very performant. But it takes to much time for
> simple upgrades.
>
> Anyway, I am trying also to compile the sources but using the debian way
> as reported in
> http://www.falkotimme.com/howtos/de...nel2.6_compile/
>
> BTW, how did you manage the initrd stuff? Did you just skip it?
Yes, I skipped the initrd. I never figured out how to get an initrd
working, and initrd is not really needed as long as the "important" stuff
is compiled directly into the kernel.
| |
| Paulo da Silva 2006-03-21, 2:54 am |
| Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:21:59 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Yes, I skipped the initrd. I never figured out how to get an initrd
> working, and initrd is not really needed as long as the "important" stuff
> is compiled directly into the kernel.
>
That's what I did and now everything is running fine.
Compiling the kernel debian way did not work either!
I think initrd images generated, at least for the "testing"
version, are broken.
Hopefully someone from devel. have a word about this ...
I reported a bug anyway ...
| |
| Paulo da Silva 2006-03-21, 2:54 am |
| Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:21:59 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Yes, I skipped the initrd. I never figured out how to get an initrd
> working, and initrd is not really needed as long as the "important" stuff
> is compiled directly into the kernel.
>
That's what I did and now everything is running fine.
Compiling the kernel debian way did not work either!
I think initrd images generated, at least for the "testing"
version, are broken.
Hopefully someone from devel. have a word about this ...
I reported a bug anyway ...
| |
| Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) 2006-03-21, 2:54 am |
| On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:32:46 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:
> [...]
> I think initrd images generated, at least for the "testing"
> version, are broken.
> Hopefully someone from devel. have a word about this ...
> I reported a bug anyway ...
I'm using stable, and I wasn't able to get it working. Maybe Debian needs
an initrd faq.
It would be interesting if I could peek around in the initrd image by
loop-mounting it, but I don't know what filesystem type is used for it.
| |
| Paulo da Silva 2006-03-21, 7:52 am |
| Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
....
>
> It would be interesting if I could peek around in the initrd image by
> loop-mounting it, but I don't know what filesystem type is used for it.
>
I can help you about this ...
About debian initrd images you can extract its contenta as follow:
gzip -dc initrd.img > initrd
cpio -idv < initrd
or
gzip -dc initrd.img | cpio -idv
Unfortunately, when I tryed to reverse these steps (see info cpio)
I did not get a working image. May be I made some mistake or I
should have used mkinitrd.
Anyway I did not take a sgnificant amount of time
hacking this thing ...
An approach to follow is to look at the way debian utils build
the image, where they get its contents from.
If you have time to spend with this and reach any conclusion, I would
be pleased to hear from you.
Regards
Paulo
| |
| Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) 2006-03-21, 5:49 pm |
| On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 13:17:20 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:
> Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
> ...
>
>
> I can help you about this ...
> About debian initrd images you can extract its contenta as follow:
>
> gzip -dc initrd.img > initrd
> cpio -idv < initrd
>
> or
>
> gzip -dc initrd.img | cpio -idv
>
gzip said "not in gzip format".
> Unfortunately, when I tryed to reverse these steps (see info cpio)
> I did not get a working image. May be I made some mistake or I
> should have used mkinitrd.
> Anyway I did not take a sgnificant amount of time
> hacking this thing ...
>
> An approach to follow is to look at the way debian utils build
> the image, where they get its contents from.
>
> If you have time to spend with this and reach any conclusion, I would
> be pleased to hear from you.
>
> Regards
> Paulo
Since my system is working properly, I think I'll leave initrd alone. I
don't need to lose any more hair over this 
| |
| Paulo da Silva 2006-03-21, 5:49 pm |
| Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
....
>
>
> gzip said "not in gzip format".
>
You told me you are using stable. ... may be it is in another
format ... may be cramfs.
Try
mount -t cramfs initrd.img some_dir -o loop
Be sure you have cramfs module or compiled into your kernel.
If it does not work, try
file initrd.img
to see what kind of file it is ...
....
>
> Since my system is working properly, I think I'll leave initrd alone. I
> don't need to lose any more hair over this
>
My problem is to know if it is worthwhile to loose hair changing to
debian when simple things like this do not work :-)
Is only this or what comes next?
| |
| Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) 2006-03-22, 2:46 am |
| On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 18:06:22 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:
> Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
> ...
>
> You told me you are using stable. ... may be it is in another
> format ... may be cramfs.
>
> Try
> mount -t cramfs initrd.img some_dir -o loop
>
> Be sure you have cramfs module or compiled into your kernel.
>
Thank you very much. Within seconds of reading your post, I was looking
into the initrd. I had always attempted to mount it without specifying the
filesystem type assuming that it would auto-detect it. For cramfs, it
doesn't auto-detect.
> If it does not work, try
> file initrd.img
> to see what kind of file it is ...
> ...
> My problem is to know if it is worthwhile to loose hair changing to
> debian when simple things like this do not work :-)
>
> Is only this or what comes next?
Debian is certainly a hundred times more complicated than Slackware, but
it's not so bad because Debian leaves open the choice to do things a
simpler but non-Debian way.
For example, you can compile the kernel with old way, without make-kpkg
and without initrd and without devfs. If you don't like the way debian has
built a package, you can download the source and compile it yourself; you
don't even have to apply the debian patches.
Believe me, it could be much worse; we could be using Linspire 5.0 where
the development tools (gcc+make), manual pages and FAQs are not
installed by default. Or we could be using Windows where the developement
tools are proprietary, and the company has a stated purpose of placing the
world under global software slavery.
Compared to some of the alternatives, Debian, both the operating system
and the people, are positively from heaven, and that's why I donated a
little money to Debian when I bought my disks
|
|
|
|
|