On 12/08/2007 10:10 PM, Felix Miata wrote: > On 2007/12/08 08:32 (GMT-0500) Carlos E. R. apparently typed: > >> I rebooted without that option, and libata is not loaded, and I can access >> all my partitions. >> > > Now maybe the thread can get onto answering the reason why I started it, and > the thread subject: "does anyone know if hwprobe=-modules.pata has any > meaning or relevance to anything other than the YaST installer?" > I sure don't understand your statement Felix. What do you think we were trying to do? It is obvious by what Carlos discovered by trial is that if the libata modules (in his case ata_piix and ata_generic) are not in the initrd, it boots even without the hwprobe line (if I understood what he did). It is also obvious with it in the boot arguments, that even if the libata modules ARE in the initrd, it keeps them from loading and allows the regular ide drivers to control. So hwprobe=-modules.pata does have relevance to more than the installer, but it is possible to work without it. It may not be able for the installer to work without it, since you can not change its initrd. At least that is my understanding AFTER the things Carlos has been willing to test. Mine would not be a good one to use to test, as I use libata.
-- Joe Morris Registered Linux user 231871 running openSUSE 10.3 x86_64 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
