Charles A Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Han Boetes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > What errors do you see?
> >
> > Are you a lilo maintainer? Didn't you read my previous messages? Why
> > are you asking me to repeat myself?
>
>
> You never stated what the error was, only that you spent "8
From: "Charles A Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'm not so sure.
>
> Running your latest kernel_ent rebuilt for Athlon all linux partitions
> reiserfs
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] noarch]# lilo -v
> LILO version 22.5.7.2, Copyright (C) 1992-1998 Werner Almesberger
> Development beyond version 21 Copyrig
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 21:00:27 +0200
Han Boetes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What errors do you see?
>
> Are you a lilo maintainer? Didn't you read my previous messages? Why
> are you asking me to repeat myself?
You never stated what the error was, only that you spent
"8 hours in single usermod
Thomas Backlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Han Boetes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Thomas Backlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > From: "Pixel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >
> > > > booh. lilo-22.5.X seems really not stable... I'm wondering if
> > > > the best solution would not be to switch t
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 22:36:00 +0300
"Thomas Backlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I verified this by installing lilo from MDK 9.1 ... same problem...
> Then I tested my 2.4.22-0.5.2tmb_mdk ... same problem...
I'm not so sure.
Running your latest kernel_ent rebuilt for Athlon all linux partition
From: "Han Boetes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Thomas Backlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: "Pixel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > booh. lilo-22.5.X seems really not stable... I'm wondering if the
> > > best solution would not be to switch to lilo-22.4.1 ...
> >
> > Actually lilo is not to blame
Le Jeudi 21 Août 2003 22:58, Juan Quintela a écrit :
> > "thomas" == Thomas Backlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> thomas> From: "Pixel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >> "Thomas Backlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> > doing a lilo -v5 shows:
> >> >
> >> > --- cut ---
> >> > Calling map_insert_
Thomas Backlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Pixel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > booh. lilo-22.5.X seems really not stable... I'm wondering if the
> > best solution would not be to switch to lilo-22.4.1 ...
>
> Actually lilo is not to blame for this...
>
> It's a kernel reiserfs bug :-(
Impo
> "thomas" == Thomas Backlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
thomas> From: "Pixel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> "Thomas Backlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > doing a lilo -v5 shows:
>> >
>> > --- cut ---
>> > Calling map_insert_data
>> > fd 5: REISERFS_IOC_UNPACK
>> > fd 5: offset 2560 -> dev
From: "Pixel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "Thomas Backlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > doing a lilo -v5 shows:
> >
> > --- cut ---
> > Calling map_insert_data
> > fd 5: REISERFS_IOC_UNPACK
> > fd 5: offset 2560 -> dev 0xe0, LBA 8011921
> > fd 5: REISERFS_IOC_UNPACK
> > fd 5: offset 3072 -> dev 0
Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Thomas Backlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > doing a lilo -v5 shows:
> >
> > Calling map_insert_data
> > fd 5: REISERFS_IOC_UNPACK
> > fd 5: offset 2560 -> dev 0xe0, LBA 8011921
> > fd 5: REISERFS_IOC_UNPACK
> > fd 5: offset 3072 -> dev 0xe0, LBA 8011922
"Thomas Backlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> doing a lilo -v5 shows:
>
> --- cut ---
> Calling map_insert_data
> fd 5: REISERFS_IOC_UNPACK
> fd 5: offset 2560 -> dev 0xe0, LBA 8011921
> fd 5: REISERFS_IOC_UNPACK
> fd 5: offset 3072 -> dev 0xe0, LBA 8011922
> --- cut ---
>
> the same goes on a
> Name: lilo Relocations: (not relocateable)
> Version : 22.5.7.2 Vendor: MandrakeSoft
> Release : 1mdk Build Date: Thu Aug 21
00:21:06 2003
Anyone else see any weird thing with this one?
I'm running the 0.6
13 matches
Mail list logo
