Re: [Bug 1338076] kernel crash on boot, just when gdm is supposed to launch

[Peter G.]

Felix Miata  wrote:

> Neither X server nor Intel driver are static. They keep 
evolving, and bugs
> creep in. With fewer and fewer i686 alpha and beta testers 
reporting
> problems, and fewer developers to both care about and able 
to fix them,
> getting bugs found and fixed takes longer, and longer. It's 
why i686
> trouble is not going to block F24 release, and F24 won't be 
advertised as
> an available arch when F24 is released.
> 
> Did you look at 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F24_bugs before
> choosing to replace your functioning installation with a 
pre-release? The
> very first bug there should have given you cause to 
investigate before
> disposing of your full functionality. We've been having 
trouble with 32
> bit Intel for several months.
> 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1302071 
was filed
> more than 4 months ago, and is not! marked FIXED. This 
mailing list has
> warned of various 32 bit troubles several times since then. 
I have several
> F24 installations on Intel i686, probably all of which have 
been
> non-functional with some or all kernels since F23 was 
released. The
> machine I tested with before my bug 1338076 comment just 
hours ago works
> fine with its prior 4.5 kernel, but not with 4.5.4-300. My 
other machines
> have been similarly hit and miss.
> 
> If you want a working system back soon, I suggest you 
consider either
> restoring your backup of F23 if you have one, reinstalling 
F23 if you
> don't, or, now that i686 is being squeezed out of Fedora, 
consider a
> different (Plasma 5, or lighter weight) distro with less 
evolutionary
> activity.
> 
> FWIW, I have openSUSE Tumbleweed, in which current kernel 
is 4.5.4,
> installed on all the machines on which I have F23, F24 and 
F25 installed.
> I don't remember (but don't trust my memory) any of them 
having similar
> trouble with post-4.3 kernels, though on them, I'm not 
using Plasma 5,
> only KDE3, or TDE  https://wiki.trinitydesktop.org/FedoraInstall>. I've been 
finding Plasma 5
> borderline usable on (single core) i686 hardware, and older 
KDEs *far*
> more responsive.

I have high hopes :-) I am sure this will get fixed. I don't 
think it's such a big deal. I don't understand much of the 
output, but it seems like there's a clue with the handoff 
from Plymouth to mutter, when starting GDM. I might be able 
to resolve it immediately by switching to SDDM, but I haven't 
tried that.

In any case, the bug has been marked as a duplicate and it 
seems that the problem is much bigger, affecting x86_64, too!

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1335173
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Bug 1338076] kernel crash on boot, just when gdm is supposed to launch

[Peter G.]

Felix Miata wrote:

> Nomodeset has three primary purposes:
> 
> 1-workaround for Anaconda, which can't always work with all 
hardware. It
> causes fallback to a low-performance generic Xorg video 
driver, good only
> to make X work at all when something is broken.

The fallback works, sort of. Good enough to install and run 
gnome, but somewhat choppily, I think. KDe doesn't run at 
all, however, but this might or might not be a related 
problem (I suspect it is related, since it worked in F23).

> 2-required kernel cmdline parameter for old, little-used 
hardware for
> which there is no KMS mode driver support for Xorg.

KMS has been working with this hardware since 3-4 years or 
more. I recall the hours I spent booting and rebooting with 
nomodeset and i915.modeset=1 etc. and the joy I felt when it 
finally just worked without further ado. It has been working 
for a long, long time ;-) until just now :-O

> 3-troubleshooting tool, for collecting logs and 
reconfiguring when crashes
> or other problems prevent operation without it.

Without it, I might not have been able to recognize or view 
the kernel crash output this morning h/t

> Only in case 2 should it be included in a normal Grub menu. 
Unfortunately,
> when needed for case 1, it typically remains included in in 
Grub
> configuration post-installation, which causes grief for 
those who aren't
> aware of its nature and need for removal as a part of 
installation
> cleanup. Anaconda simply doesn't have the sophistication to 
do that kind
> of cleanup.
> 
> With the hardware of this bug's case, not removing it is 
fortunate,
> because of the brokenness that prevents operation at all 
(except possibly
> via remote login, or possibly booting to multi-user.target 
or lower)
> without it.

I sure hope we can get this fixed :-) Whatever broke it 
happened after f23, since it worked splendidly right up until 
about Saturday, when I overwrote f23 with f24 (clean 
install).
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: i686 got past TPM, but now video problem

[Peter G.]

Adam Williamson wrote:

> That's a kernel crash. If you boot with 'nomodeset' added 
back you
> should be able to report a bug for it. I can't remember if 
we have abrt
> collection of kernel traces set up ATM; if not, you can 
just file a bug
> at https://bugs.freedesktop.org (against xorg 
Driver/intel) , describe
> the issue and include the stack trace - you can find it in 
the journal,
> there will be 'cut here' lines showing you where to cut.

I just filed a bug on bugzilla. Won't that do?
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: i686 got past TPM, but now video problem

[Peter G.]

If you have anything to add, I have made a bug report:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1338076
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: i686 got past TPM, but now video problem

[Peter G.]

There's definitely a bug here!

First try, I removed nomodeset and I got the expected fedora 
infinity and everything went well, just like in f23 and just 
like in the regular anaconda installer on the live CD, 
except...

GDM never starts! The computer just hangs. I cannot use ESC 
to switch to the text output, I cannot ctrl-alt to another 
virtual terminal. I think the kernel crashes just at the 
point when GDM is supposed t kick in.

This is exactly what happened when I booted the f24 live CD 
and that is why I had to choose the graphics lite installer 
from the troubleshooting menu.

To get more information, as Chris suggested, I tried a second 
time, this time removing not just nomodeset, but also rhgb 
and quiet.

The tex flashed by so quickly, that I couldn't read anything 
long enough to remember what it said, but it all looked good 
(having stared at this output 1000 times before). At sme 
pint, what I presume to be the framebuffer kicked in and the 
font whent smaller and it had a nice graphical look and in 
colour.

Then, suddenly, after a line appeared about GDM having 
started, or something like that, the screen flashed 
momentarily and new text appeared, all in white on black, 
with the name of my computer, Compaq, at the top. A fifth of 
the way down the screen, there is a heading Call Trace 
followed by three lines and then Stack followed by the rest 
of the screen. Page Up/Page Down do nothing and the computer 
is hung.

(The previous boot, when I had removed nomodeset, but left in 
rhgb and quiet, I couldn't switch to text with ESC, as I had 
indicated above, but I followed up with a regular boot 
without changing the linux16 line in the grub menu and the 
first message that appeared on the Gnome desktop after 
logging in was that /boot/vmlinuz- had crashed. I presume 
that this information had been left over from the previous 
boot, sine I had the same thing happen last night when I 
tried to start KDE Plasma and got the black screen, then 
logged out and into Gnome and received a message stating that 
Plasma had crashed. Somehow, these messages from the previous 
boot and previous login get sent to the Gnome desktop on the 
subsequent login.)
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: i686 got past TPM, but now video problem

[Peter G.]

That's lots of information and none of it conflicting. Thanks, 
guys! I'll give it a try. It sounds very encouraging. This old 
box isn't done yet ;-)

Yep, I realize that i686 is no longer supported, but I just 
can't rationalize spending hundreds on a new laptop (or other 
portable), considering that I do 95% of my computing on the 
desktop and the laptop has been working fine. Now, with F24, I 
am running into a couple of problems, first TPM, now graphics, 
but I think it's just some bad settings. I'm sure the machine 
is fine.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

i686 got past TPM, but now video problem

[Peter G.]

In F23, all went fine, but in F24, some video problems are 
showing up.

After the grub menu, the machine is supposed to switch to the 
framebuffer and the boot image (fedora infinity goes from 
white to filled in) appears and one can switch to the boot 
message display with ESC.

Well, not in F24 :-( Now, it appears that the framebuffer 
never gets started (is that Pkymouth?). Instead, the boot 
messages scroll past, in large font, not small like normal 
under the framebuffer, and then it suddenly switches to a 
blank display with a wide progress bar at the bottom, 
starting with white, I think, then, as it moves across the 
screen to the right, it changes to light blue, and finally 
dark blue.

Next, the screen flashes some and artifacts appear, with 
coloured boxes and things (mode-setting?) and then the GDM 
prompt appears, as expected. I click on my user name and the 
password field opens and I can select either Gnome or KDE.

When I select Gnome, there is more mode-switching and 
artifacts and a black screen, then the desktop appears.

When I select KDE, there is a lot of screen flashing (mode-
setting?) and artifacts covering half of the screen, then the 
starfield background image appears and the KDE logo with the 
progress bar. It is all very jerky, not smooth, like in F23. 
Once the progress bar reaches the right, the screen fades, by 
stutters, to black and the Plasma setup menu (the square in 
the upper left corner with the 3 bars) appears momentarily, 
before the screen blacks out completely, leaving only the 
functioning mouse pointer visible. Nothing happens :-(

ctrl-alt-del is the only thing I have been able to 
successfully do. This brings up the logout screen, which 
appears in stutters and very slowly, only the top portion of 
the rectangle, then the rest, etc. I successfully log out and 
GDM reappears, with more mode-switching and I am able to log 
in to Gnome.

There is a whole lot of 'mode-switching' from the grub menu 
to the appearance of the desktop.

I suspect that, for some reason, the framebuffer never gets 
started right from where grub gives the boot process over to 
Plymouth and then it's set all wrong.

Is there a way I can tell the computer to boot in the proper 
mode right at the grub prompt, or even set it permanently?

My suspicion is that, when I installed from the live CD, I 
had trouble with the graphical mode, so I had to select the 
graphics lite from the troubleshooting screen and somehow 
this setting has been made permanent.

I want to get it back to how it was set when I used F23. Is 
this possible? Or have there been some major graphical 
changes in F24 that have finally obsoleted my aging machine 
(I don't think so, actually)?
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Congratulations for F24ß

[Peter G.]

Sérgio Basto wrote:

> yeah ß is not an β
> alt gr + s writes ß ( but this is not an beta )

I never knew that there was a real beta character! es-zett is 
easy to type: just right-alt-s. How do you type the Greek beta 
from the keyboard (I use US dead keys—always and exclusively)?
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Congratulations for F24ß

[Peter G.]

Just a test to see if I configured Knode correctly, but might 
as well make it worthwhile ;-)

I'm very pleased with the release so far and have run into no 
problems (exception: TPM on laptop, but that's something for 
bugzilla).
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: One Desktop and one Desktop ONLY.

[Peter G.]

Ed Greshko wrote:

 Sorry to start yet another thread on the same 
issue

I downloaded the KDE live image and then, even though I 
never use it, ran:

sudo yum groupinstall GNOME

Next, this got me a few more programs:

sudo yum groupinstall Fedora Workstation

I aborted the following, because it pulled in the input 
methods crap:

sudo yum groupinstall KDE Plasma Workspaces

Instead, I ran:

sudo yum groupinstall kde-desktop-environment
sudo yum groupinstall gnome-desktop

I think I got pretty much all of it, without having to 
tinker around (too much).

I still haven't logged in to Gnome, although I have 
been on Fedora 21 since Saturday. I admit that I 
installed Fedora 21ßRC4, since it snowed on Saturday 
and I didn't have the time during the week.

It has all gone super! Kudos to the developers and 
packagers!!!

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

test

[Peter G.]

for the Knode setup in fedora 21ß

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: services and systemd in F16

[Peter G.]

Adam Williamson wrote:

 'systemctl status sshd.service' will tell you about the service: it
 should say 'active (running)'. 'failed' or 'active (exited)' would be
 bad.

This is the command I have been relying on.

 1. systemd will automatically recognize that I need sshd.service to be
 started and will therefore start it for me; or does it mean that
 
 2. I have to manually start sshd.service before I run sftp, sshfs, etc.
 
 It means 1. But this is a generic message that's essentially just
 s-c-services saying 'this is a systemd service and I don't know anything
 about it'.  Not all systemd services are actually taking advantage of
 systemd's socket activation feature yet - in fact, most of them aren't.
 I think sshd is not using this feature, and it just runs on boot like it
 did with sysv.

That answers my question. Thanks.

I am looking forward to the day when systemd becomes smart enough to know that 
it should start the required service for me.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: grub2 and kernel-PAE with Fedora 16α {solved}

[Peter G.]

Tom H wrote:

 info -f grub2 -n 'Simple configuration'

Thanks. I found that later on. I put info:/grub2 into konqueror and the simple 
configuration link leapt out at me.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

grub2 and kernel-PAE with Fedora 16α

[Peter G.]

I installed (rpm -ivh) kernel-PAE on a Fedora 16α system.
I changed /etc/sysconfig/kernel: DEFAULTKERNEL=kernel-PAE

The new kernel-PAE shows up in grub.cfg, but some things are not quite how they 
should be:

- the menu entry for kernel-PAE is not of the same format as the other lines
- the echo line that says booting kernel not not show the PAE part
- no rescue mode menu entry for the kernel-PAE was created

Does grubby not understand grub2 mmenu format? Should I have installed the 
kernel-PAE with yum instead of rpm to get it correctly incorporated into the 
grub2 menu? Something else?

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: grub2 and kernel-PAE with Fedora 16α {solved}

[Peter G.]

Tom H wrote:

 On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 1:46 AM, Peter G. pguec...@gmail.com wrote:

 - no rescue mode menu entry for the kernel-PAE was created
 
 Because grubby only creates one entry when a new kernel's installed;
 grub2-mkconfig ... creates a regular entry and a single one

I just ran grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg and I now have both the 
regular and rescue lines.

 (unless you change that default behavior in /etc/default/grub)

I didn't make any changes.


-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: grub2 and kernel-PAE with Fedora 16α {solved}

[Peter G.]

Tom H wrote:

 I wasn't implying that you had.

I never got the impression that you were implying that I had changed the file 
:-)

I thought you were stating that I _must_ change the file to get the result I 
wanted :-)

 I was only pointing out that some people - like me - do so

I looked at the file, but there was no way for me to know what kind of changes 
I 
might want to make... and I found that everything worked fine without me making 
any changes, so I left it at that :-)

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

services and systemd in F16

[Peter G.]

In the system-config-services, I see that sshd is not running when I boot the 
computer.

The message at the top right says that:

The sshd service is managed by systemd. It may be started then run in the 
background, or be activated on demand...

I am unclear about the be activated on demand part. Does this mean that, when 
I run a program like sftp or sshfs, that:

1. systemd will automatically recognize that I need sshd.service to be started 
and will therefore start it for me; or does it mean that

2. I have to manually start sshd.service before I run sftp, sshfs, etc.

???

Please clarify.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: setting up ssh {solved}

[Peter G.]

Michael Spahn wrote:

 In my opionion it's still a bug, the should be a notice what Apply mean.

I agree. I meant that I don't need any more hints or tips, because I have 
solved 
the problem and I now have ssh working. Clearly, as I was trying to get this 
solved, we stumbled across a bug in the firewall configuration program. It does 
not work as it is expected to.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

setting up ssh

[Peter G.]

I have fedora 16α installed on both computers.
The two computers are connected to one another via a router.
They can ping one another.
sshd is running on both computers.

# netstat -tulpn | grep :22
tcp0  0 0.0.0.0:22  0.0.0.0:*   
LISTEN  11865/sshd  
tcp0  0 :::22   :::*
LISTEN  11865/sshd

Yet ssh/scp/sftp/sshfs all report:

ssh: connect to host 192.168.1.66 port 22: No route to host
connection reset by peer

What is happening? How can I get the computers to communicate?

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: setting up ssh

[Peter G.]

Michael Cronenworth wrote:

 netstat lists network port information. It does not know about or list
 firewall configuration information.
 
 iptables is the command-line tool to view, add, delete, or change
 firewall rules.
 
 # iptables -L# lists default table rules
 
 # iptables -L | grep ssh
 ACCEPT tcp  --  anywhere anywherestate NEW
 tcp dpt:ssh

See! Google is unreliable for giving the right answers.

Thanks. I tried the command and it returned no output. That means the firewall 
is not open on any port, I presume.

Why would that be? I unchecked and rechecked ssh as a trusted serive and then 
applied the changes numerous times already. And it the firewall setup program 
doesn't work, how am I supposed to open the port?


-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: setting up ssh

[Peter G.]

Michael Cronenworth wrote:

 # iptables -L | grep ssh
 ACCEPT tcp  --  anywhere anywherestate NEW
 tcp dpt:ssh

You know, I just tried your command again, but this time without grepping, and 
I see that ssh is nowhere in the output, so how could grep ssh ever return 
anything?

But, when I examine /etc/sysconfig/iptables, I see:

-A INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT

Doesn't that mean that port 22 is open?

And if so, why does your command not show any output, while 
/etc/sysconfig/iptables would suggest that the port is opened?

Any yet, there is still no communication possible. What is wrong?

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: setting up ssh

[Peter G.]

Michael Spahn wrote:

 I learned that the firewall system-config tool doesn't work.
 
 I actually don't know why but I always had to disable the whole firewall.

I never had to disable the firewall in f13 or f14 or f15 for ssh (only for nfs, 
which I no longer use, because of that and other reasons). Yes, disabling would 
work, of course, but that is not an acceptable solution for ssh.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: setting up ssh

[Peter G.]

Michael Cronenworth wrote:

 # iptables -A INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 22 -j
 # ACCEPT
 
 As Michael said, system-config-firewall has a bug. You two should file a
 bug against it.

Thanks for all the help. I hope this will now work. I will try it in a couple 
of 
hours... need to pick up my car :-)

iptables -L does now show an ssh entry. Does this also do ipv6 (or would I ever 
need to deal with this in an ipv6 situation, down the road?)?

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: setting up ssh

[Peter G.]

Clyde E. Kunkel wrote:

   I assume you have rebooted after changing firewall rules

no. I didn't. Linux folklore states that rebooing is not necessary

   and/or issued:
 
 # systemctl restart iptables.service

I didn know I had to.

 If so, then I dunno

but I do... now.


-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: setting up ssh

[Peter G.]

Michael Cronenworth wrote:

 The apply button in system-config-firewall should apply the firewall
 settings. He shouldn't need to reboot or reload the iptables rules.

That's what I thought. That's why it says apply. Apply means to put into being, 
now.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: setting up ssh

[Peter G.]

Michael Cronenworth wrote:

 Peter G. wrote:
 iptables -L does now show an ssh entry. Does this also do ipv6 (or would
 I ever need to deal with this in an ipv6 situation, down the road?)?
 
 No. You will want ip6tables for that.

Odd. I just checked /etc/sysconfig/ip6tables and there is this line:

-A INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT

But, then, we have the same situation as above, I guess, where you said there 
was a difference between the saved configuration and the current, in-memory 
configuration.

Oddly, though:

# ip6tables -L|grep ssh
ACCEPT tcp  anywhere anywhere state NEW tcp 
dpt:ssh

I guess thatś because I restarted after I came back from the body shop.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: setting up ssh

[Peter G.]

Michael Spahn wrote:

 Bug is opened, feel free to add a comment.
 
 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=733778
 
 Regards
 
 Michael

Thanks. I was going to do that after I get back from a jog :-)

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: GRUB FAilure

[Peter G.]

Marty Felkler wrote:

 you can use the command
 grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub/grub.cfg to create grub.cfg
grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg

 you  have to hand edit to grub.cfg to make the other entries.
create other entries in /boot/grub2/custom.cfg
don't hand edit grub.cfg at all

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: setting up ssh {solved}

[Peter G.]

Michael Cronenworth wrote:

 # ip(6)tables -A INPUT -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 22 -j
 # ACCEPT

 run systemctl restart iptables.service and
 systemctl restart ip6tables.service

This works.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Adding Fedora15 to F16alpha grub2 menu {solved}

[Peter G.]

Adam Williamson wrote:

 did you run 'update_grub'?

no I didn't. first I heard of it. that might 
explain it. but I learned something and I think I 
prefer the custom.cfg method, anyway :-)

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Adding Fedora15 to F16alpha grub2 menu {solved}

[Peter G.]

Peter G.  wrote:

 Adam Williamson wrote:
 
 did you run 'update_grub'?
 
 no I didn't. first I heard of it. that might
 explain it. but I learned something and I think 
I
 prefer the custom.cfg method, anyway :-)
 

I don't seem to have that program, or if I do, 
it's not in my/root's path.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Adding Fedora15 to F16alpha grub2 menu

[Peter G.]

Tom H wrote:

 The default Fedora install, up to now, has been to have a separate
 /boot in order to use LVM for /. That's one reason and there are
 others (for example, some people don't mount /boot at boot; they
 only mount it to update the kernel and the boot config and then
 unmount it).

I never figured out a use for LVM, either ;-) I think I read it's going 
bye-bye, isn't 
it? Something about btrfs making it irrelevant?

And I don't know why you wouldn't want to mount /boot at boot. But I am just 
running a 
home desktop and a laptop computer :-) Nothing quirky, just what a man needs to 
be on 
the web.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test