Bug#718761: flash-kernel: 'root=' kernel param ignored when flash-kernel package is installed
Package: flash-kernel Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system Dear Maintainer, *** Please consider answering these questions, where appropriate *** Steps which led to the problem: 1. Installed a new kernel package on a functioning system. 2. Generated a new uImage and uInitrd using mkimage. 3. Rebooted system. Result: System shutdown but didn't become available on network. Steps to diagnose: 1. Obtained access to a serial console. 2. Discovered that boot was interrupted because it timed out when trying to mount the root filesystem, which was reported to be /dev/root. 3. Restored the previous uImage and uInitrd and successfully rebooted. 4. Adjusted rootdelay=60 and tried rebooting again with the problematic uImage and uInitrd again. Rootfs still unavailable. 5. Other stuff that didn't help. 6. Found that the root= kernel param was being ignored by the initrams init scripts, even though other parameters, like rootdelay were being honored. 7. Read through startup scripts and found that the incorrect value for root seemed to originate in conf/param.con 8. Read through mkinitramfs scripts and found that a hook installed by the flash-kernel package was responsible for the hook script that was setting root=/dev/root in conf/param.con. Steps to correct: 1. Uninstalled flash-kernel. 2. Updated problematic initramfs. 3. Confirmed that conf/param.conf wasn't in the updated initramfs. 4. Updated uInitrd image. 5. Rebooted. 6. Success! Expected behavior: I expect my machine to (re)boot successfully and without intervention after the installation of a new kernel. If flash-kernel isn't necessary/required on my device, I would expect it to detect that fact rather than rendering my system in an unbootable state. I realize that my system (a ZyXel NSA320 modified to boot debian) isn't particularly common, but I also know that there is a community of people running debain on Kirkwood devices using the same technique, and I doubt I am the only one to think that flash-kernel might be a useful package to have installed. Unfortunately, I don't have enough knowledge to suggest a remedy. Perhaps the logic needs to be more sophisticated, or perhaps people porting debian to these devices should be doing something so the scripts know that the bootloader provided value is trustworthy. Thanks. -- System Information: Debian Release: 7.1 APT prefers stable APT policy: (990, 'stable') Architecture: armel (armv5tel) Kernel: Linux 3.9.11-kirkwood-tld-1 (PREEMPT) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages flash-kernel depends on: pn devionone ii initramfs-tools 0.112~bpo70+1 ii linux-base 3.5 flash-kernel recommends no packages. Versions of packages flash-kernel suggests: ii u-boot-tools 2012.04.01-2 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130805064552.7180.89948.reportbug@fidy
Bug#718698: [os-prober] ReiserFS support
if the Debian installer doesn't allow the use of reiserFS this mean that there will be no new users with this filesystem. But old users (like me) could survive (silently) again for few years. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51ffa967.4020...@gmail.com
Re: Bug#718698: [os-prober] ReiserFS support
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 03:32:23PM +0200, Francesco Muzio wrote: if the Debian installer doesn't allow the use of reiserFS this mean that there will be no new users with this filesystem. But old users (like me) could survive (silently) again for few years. Shouldn't os-prober at least be able to recognise OS's that use reiser as other OS's? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130805172654.ga18...@topoi.pooq.com
Re: Debian installer build: failed powerpc builds
Quoting Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org):
Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org (2013-08-04):
The relevant fix was committed in D-I git repository (dropping no
longer existing nic-extra-modules... for powerpc and indeed several
other architectures) but it seems that the build machine didn't cope
with that. Is that something that should be looked by buildd admins?
Nope, in git:
| kibi@bowmore:~/debian-installer/installer$ git grep nic-extra
| build/pkg-lists/netboot/powerpc.cfg:nic-extra-modules-${kernel:Version}
| […]
Gah. Forgotten git add I guess.
Fixed.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bug#716978: initramfs not setting up crypto
I think I am seeing the same bug reported in #716978... I just did an install of wheezy using a d-i daily (updated today 2013-08-05). The root is md raid-crypt-lvm. Upon boot the initramfs started up the md raid devices properly, but failed to setup the crypto and dropped to an initramfs shell. When I poke around I see that /lib/modules/3.2.0-4-amd64/kernel/crypto/ is lacking most of the crypto modules (including the xts/serpant/etc that my system needed). So I am unable to bring things up by hand either. During the install, for the question about how much to include in the initramfs, I picked the just what's needed by this system answer, although I think that should have been OK. Thanks, -- Matt Taggart tagg...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130805233139.23204...@taggart.lackof.org
Debian installer build: failed or old builds
Debian installer build overview --- Failed or old builds: * OLD BUILD:ia64 May 26 00:12 buildd@alkman build_cdrom http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/ia64/daily/build_cdrom.log * OLD BUILD:ia64 May 26 00:16 buildd@alkman build_netboot http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/ia64/daily/build_netboot.log * FAILED BUILD: kfreebsd-amd64 Aug 06 00:35 buildd@fano build_netboot http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/kfreebsd-amd64/daily/build_netboot.log * FAILED BUILD: kfreebsd-amd64 Aug 06 00:37 buildd@fano build_netboot-9 http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/kfreebsd-amd64/daily/build_netboot-9.log * FAILED BUILD: kfreebsd-amd64 Aug 06 00:40 buildd@fano build_netboot-gtk http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/kfreebsd-amd64/daily/build_netboot-gtk.log * FAILED BUILD: kfreebsd-amd64 Aug 06 00:43 buildd@fano build_netboot-gtk-9 http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/kfreebsd-amd64/daily/build_netboot-gtk-9.log * FAILED BUILD: kfreebsd-i386 Aug 06 00:44 buildd@finzi build_netboot http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/kfreebsd-i386/daily/build_netboot.log * FAILED BUILD: kfreebsd-i386 Aug 06 00:51 buildd@finzi build_netboot-9 http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/kfreebsd-i386/daily/build_netboot-9.log Totals: 158 builds (6 failed, 2 old) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1v6vda-um...@ravel.debian.org
