Hi,
I didn't catch all mails concerning this topic, but I had the same errors.
The problem was, that I used XFS for the root-FS, because the modules
needed in intrd are too big to fit on the floppy. The moment I changed over
'/' (a small one with 150 MB) to ext3 or ReiseFS it worked without pro
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>and what if smbd install on XFS / raid and can not remember
>>exactly which stripe_size and/or raid_dev and/or in which order he maked
>>the raids
>>the kernel from the CD doesn't have compiled in raid so no autodetect
>>i'm
>
>
>The problem is that it's not -accessible- to newbies currently. E.g
>"easily usable".
>
diskdrake works perfectly for a standart home PC, and it's easy to do
what is the difference between working with standart partitions and LVM
that we should add the partitions to VG -- thats all, everyth
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
i think this is a big misstake,
lvm is definetly not advanced/expert feature
>>>why so ?
>>>
>>it makes life simplier,
>>
>
>This isn't the obvious definition of advanced/expert feature.
>
i was talking , why it is
>
>>/boot where i have my radtab,
>>
>
>you can mount the separate /boot ?
>
it's ext2 /dev/hde5 , no troubles mounting it
> and i'm not that shure but i think i can not create more then 2 or 3 raids
>( i have 6, with LVM over them )
>
>
>why ?
>
mkraid complained smth about no such device i
>>i think this is a big misstake,
>>lvm is definetly not advanced/expert feature
>>
>
>why so ?
>
it makes life simplier,
the only clue i see , is that the current lvm can not initialaise the
LV's without initrd
we have to have one normal partition for the initrd
>>and it makes the life prett
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
what about " my " idea about 2 disks
>>>IMO, 2 floppies is way to unsafe. As for me, i prefer using a cdrom rescue, or
>>>
>>why should it be a way to unsafe, i would also prefer to use a rescue CD
>>it's much faster an
mcc has a facility for building the boot floppy. If
the kernel is becoming too large for a floppy, one way
to attempt to make it fit is to probe the system to
discover which kernel modules are in use and only
include them in the boot floppy.
--- Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> S
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>>Of course. The problem is to make a -bootdisk- (on a standard 1.44 floppy)
>>>with XFS support.
>>>
>>on a single standart floppy it simply doesn't work
>>we need 2 floppies , the other solution is zip/ supper disk (100/120Mb
On Fri, 2001-09-14 at 09:26, Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
> Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > retry "mkbootdisk" with it. With XFS, I'm not sure it would suffice, but
> > we can pray (and now I can't do anything else than asking we switch from
> > the Linux kernel to a less bloate
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>do you agree that we can not have a single bootable floppy
>>for xfs lvm system
>>or i'm missing smth
>>
>
>XFS is special in the sense that it has a big VFS-like bloat for patching
>on a standard 2.4 kernel, so it doesn't rea
On Tuesday 18 Sep 2001 19:32, svetljo wrote:
> Russell Cattelan wrote:
> >On Fri, 2001-09-14 at 14:49, svetljo wrote:
> >>Hi
> >>couldn't we have 2 bootdisk: one for the kernel and lilo, and one for
> >>the ramdisk
[...]
>
> Debian has allways used 2 1.44 floppies for install and rescue
> the fir
Russell Cattelan wrote:
>On Fri, 2001-09-14 at 14:49, svetljo wrote:
>
>>Hi
>>couldn't we have 2 bootdisk: one for the kernel and lilo, and one for
>>the ramdisk
>>smth like debian, the kernel is realy too big it should be much simple
>>with 2 floppies
>>
>If anybody knows how to create a 2
On Fri, 2001-09-14 at 14:49, svetljo wrote:
> Hi
> couldn't we have 2 bootdisk: one for the kernel and lilo, and one for
> the ramdisk
> smth like debian, the kernel is realy too big it should be much simple
> with 2 floppies
If anybody knows how to create a 2 floppy boot we would be interested
Yes unfortunately XFS pushes a boot floppy over the edge.
http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/faq.html#xfsfitfloppy
As the installer CD's can usually be used as a rescue disk
we haven't spent much time trying to shrink XFS ... not that
it would be an easy task.
Also note the latest linux care rescu
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>Chmouel Boudjnah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>humm actually i just tested and i created a initrd with xfs support
>>without problem.
>>
>
>Of course. The problem is to make a -bootdisk- (on a standard 1.44 floppy)
>with XFS support.
>
on a single standart floppy
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
>svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>not casual ?
>>
>
>humm i mean that this device (i believe it is not the device but the
>kernel) report wrong size so it can copy it but after booting is
>none...
>
but it works with zip, so i have pretty much place now
i thought
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
>Chmouel Boudjnah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>what do you mean by that
>>>you could place the kernel, the initrd and bootloader on a single floppy ?
>>>or you could create a initrd with xfs support ?
>>>i had no troubles crea
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
>svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>>yes i am but that another problem...
>>>
>> to have more then one boot floppy ?
>>
>
>humm actually i just tested and i created a initrd with xfs support
>without problem.
>
what do you mean by that
you could place the kernel, th
do you agree that we can not have a single bootable floppy
for xfs lvm system
or i'm missing smth
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
>svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>and what about xfs.o
>>
>
>this is another story :
>
>(chmou@kernel)[~]-% lsmod|grep xfs
>xfs 518752 1 (autocle
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
>svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>and what about xfs.o
>>
what do you mean by that, can we access a xfs root without xfs modules
in the initrd or without compileing it in the kernel
how can i build bootdisk for a xfs system ?
>
>this is another story :
>
>(chmou
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
>svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>Blue Lizard wrote:
>>
>>>I recall chmouel stating that [the mandrake] xfs patch is not so big.
>>>
>>but smbd (i think he ) said that the xfs module is ~500k
>>
>
>Numbers :
>
>Without XFS
>
>(chmou@kernel)[linux/]-% grep CONFIG_X
Blue Lizard wrote:
> I recall chmouel stating that [the mandrake] xfs patch is not so big.
>
but smbd (i think he ) said that the xfs module is ~500k
>
Le Dimanche 16 Septembre 2001 23:33, Blue Lizard scribit :
> I recall chmouel stating that [the mandrake] xfs patch is not so big.
About 1k diff.
Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] mkinitrd-3.1.6-8mdk
De : Chmouel Boudjnah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date : 15 Sep 2
I recall chmouel stating that [the mandrake] xfs patch is not so big.
>
>
>I would think worst case should be 1 floppy with
>kernel and maybe a 2nd with extra modules that could
>not fit in 1st. If kernel is too large, modulize more.
>
that was my idea too
1 floppy : kernel with compiled in raid and if there is some more space
lvm ,FSes
2 floppy : initrd with lvm-t
I would think worst case should be 1 floppy with
kernel and maybe a 2nd with extra modules that could
not fit in 1st. If kernel is too large, modulize more.
--- svetljo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> well ok , but have you compiled a xfs kernel
> how much does it weight
> my is 1.3 Mb with compiled
>>what about " my " idea about 2 disks
>>
>
>IMO, 2 floppies is way to unsafe. As for me, i prefer using a cdrom rescue, or
>
why should it be a way to unsafe, i would also prefer to use a rescue CD
it's much faster and you have much more tools,
but if you use some exotic things like RAID, LVM-1
well ok , but have you compiled a xfs kernel
how much does it weight
my is 1.3 Mb with compiled in raid-0 linear-raid lvm xfs,reiser,ext2
SI Reasoning wrote:
>Maybe it would be simpler to have the system judge
>which modules are in use when building the rescue disk
>and include only them.
>
>---
Submitted 14-Sep-01 by Guillaume Cottenceau:
> (and now I can't do anything else than asking we switch from
> the Linux kernel to a less bloated kernel if any).
The Linux kernel isn't really bloated, until you start adding the 100+
patches that make up a Mandrake kernel. I'm afraid that our atte
sorry
it was syslinux right ?
svetljo wrote:
> Hi
> couldn't we have 2 bootdisk: one for the kernel and lilo, and one for
> the ramdisk
> smth like debian, the kernel is realy too big it should be much simple
> with 2 floppies
>
> Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>
>> Chmouel Boudjnah <[EMAIL PROTE
Hi
couldn't we have 2 bootdisk: one for the kernel and lilo, and one for
the ramdisk
smth like debian, the kernel is realy too big it should be much simple
with 2 floppies
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>Chmouel Boudjnah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (andre) writes:
[...]
> > You should use rpmmon[1] and CC to the maintainer, for speed of response.
> >
> > [gc@bi ~] rpmmon -p mkbootdisk
> > yduret
[...]
> > Ref:
> > [1] http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/html/rpmmon-tut.html
[...]
> rpm -qi mkbootdisk gives [EMAIL PRO
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (andre) writes:
>
> > mkbootdisk (and subsequently drakfloppy) doesn't work with me
> >
> > Here is the error i get
> >
> > mkbootdisk --device /dev/fd0 2.4.8-12mdk
> > Insert a disk in /dev/fd0. Any information on the disk will be lost.
> > Press to continue or ^C to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (andre) writes:
> mkbootdisk (and subsequently drakfloppy) doesn't work with me
>
> Here is the error i get
>
> mkbootdisk --device /dev/fd0 2.4.8-12mdk
> Insert a disk in /dev/fd0. Any information on the disk will be lost.
> Press to continue or ^C to abort:
> /dev/fd0H
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (andre) writes:
> mkbootdisk (and subsequently drakfloppy) doesn't work with me
>
> Here is the error i get
>
> mkbootdisk --device /dev/fd0 2.4.8-12mdk
> Insert a disk in /dev/fd0. Any information on the disk will be lost.
> Press to continue or ^C to abort:
> /dev/fd0H
"Paul Giordano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Pixel,
>
> If the devices are not equal ($device <> $rdevice) then lilo gets a device
> busy attempting to write to the floppy (now, I'm using devfs and that may be
> the difference.)
>
> As long as the device lilo attempts to use is the same as
#x27;s happy (at least on my system!)
Thanks for the help...
Gio
- Original Message -
From: "Pixel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Cooker] mkbootdisk
> "Paul Giordano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Paul Giordano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also - could you change the line "boot=$device" that's written to the
> $MOUNTDIR/etc/lilo.conf to read "boot=$rdevice"? Otherwise you get a device busy
> condition using devfs - $device is /dev/fd0, $rdevice is /dev/fd0u1440.
can you explain more?
"Paul Giordano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Could you put double-quotes around the [ -z $rootdev ] at the bottom please?
ok, done
"Dmitry V. Levin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why not to add "Requires" or "Conflicts" tag about lilo requirements? :)
> It would help various automated tools to do proper package upgrades.
because it was introduced only since the new upgrade of lilo which was
only for cooker.
--
MandrakeSof
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 09:09:51PM +0100, Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
> > [11:27 root@penguin:~]# mkbootdisk --device /dev/fd0 2.2.17-28mdk
> > Insert a disk in /dev/fd0. Any information on the disk will be lost.
> > Press to continue or ^C to abort:
> > mke2fs 1.19, 13-Jul-2000 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 95/
Peter Ruskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [11:27 root@penguin:~]# mkbootdisk --device /dev/fd0 2.2.17-28mdk
> Insert a disk in /dev/fd0. Any information on the disk will be lost.
> Press to continue or ^C to abort:
> mke2fs 1.19, 13-Jul-2000 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 95/08/09
> usage: lilo [ -C config_
43 matches
Mail list logo
