Stroller wrote:
On 17 Feb 2009, at 04:17, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
I've no idea how it broke, but after an emerge --sync, a kernel
(gentoo-sources) update was there. After I compiled the kernel, I did
the usual make modules_install make install. I edited grub.conf
only to the point of
On 17 Feb 2009, at 04:51, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
Stroller wrote:
On 17 Feb 2009, at 04:17, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
I've no idea how it broke, but after an emerge --sync, a kernel
(gentoo-sources) update was there. After I compiled the kernel, I
did the usual make modules_install make
On Saturday 17 January 2009, Grant Edwards wrote:
But, now that you mention it, something in /dev was wrong
because the first time I booted Gentoo off hda2, the issue
message that's displayed before the login prompt gave
instructions on how to fix /dev. I never figured out what
exactly was
On 2009-01-17, Nicolas Sebrecht nicolas.s-...@laposte.net wrote:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 05:31:22PM +, Grant Edwards wrote:
I was following the quick install doc, and everything went
fine until I got to the section on installing grub. After
emerging grub, the root command failed:
On 2009-01-17, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday 17 January 2009, Grant Edwards wrote:
grub root (hd0,2)
Error 21: Selected disk does not exist
Did you try tab completion at:
grub root ( --tab
Nope, I didn't know about tab completion. And now that I've
got grub
On Wed, 07 May 2008 12:13:47 +0200
Sven Köhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To avoid automounting and autoinstalling with /boot,
just export the DONT_MOUNT_BOOT variable.
Which /boot partition? I don't have any ...
I believe you've already avoided it being mounted, then. :)
--
To avoid automounting and autoinstalling with /boot,
just export the DONT_MOUNT_BOOT variable.
Which /boot partition? I don't have any ...
If there's a setup-command in your grub.conf, it is indeed executed.
So if that command is outdated (something you won't notice, since that
command is
When you emerged grub-0.97-r5, this was displayed on your console:
WARN: postinst
*** IMPORTANT NOTE: you must run grub and install
the new version's stage1 to your MBR. Until you do,
stage1 and stage2 will still be the old version, but
later stages will be the new version, which could
cause
Sven Köhler wrote:
When you emerged grub-0.97-r5, this was displayed on your console:
WARN: postinst
*** IMPORTANT NOTE: you must run grub and install
the new version's stage1 to your MBR. Until you do,
stage1 and stage2 will still be the old version, but
later stages will be the new
Peter Ruskin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 07 May 2008, »Q« wrote:
Earlier today, I emerged grub-0.97-r5 on my x86 laptop, replacing
0.97-r4. I didn't run grub and didn't expect anything to be done
to my boot partition. Now I've read
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218599,
Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Saturday 26 April 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is turning into a big time sink that I don't really have so I'll
probably just use cygwin stuff to get some unix tools onto vista.
But first, are you running gentoo in a vmware on vista?
I was
Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Friday 25 April 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, I'm thinking it probably won't do any real good to monkey around
with the kernel either, if the initramfs thing isn't the problem them
it seems likely to be a vista problem.
The kernel is exactly
On Saturday 26 April 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was just starting to think you might be friend material. Then you
go and mention me and Vista in a positive sense in the same
sentence. I shall now have to send some of the lads around to your
Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The kernel is exactly where you should be monkeying. I reckon you have a
driver you need compiled in and it's a module because of the make
allconfig.
I went thru the makeconfig carefully. Even disallowing an early item
allowing intramfs boot, built
On Saturday 26 April 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is turning into a big time sink that I don't really have so I'll
probably just use cygwin stuff to get some unix tools onto vista.
But first, are you running gentoo in a vmware on vista?
I was just starting to think you might be friend
Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thursday 24 April 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So assuming I've made some mistake in grub.conf I try to boot from
grub command line.
root = (hd0,0) (which is /dev/sda1 in linux terms)
kernel /kernel-2.6.25-r1
Nope. Kernel needs a
On Thursday 24 April 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
kernel /kernel-2.6.25-r1 root=(hd0)/sda3
Fails
Won't work. (hd0) is a grub thing. You need a /dev/sda3 or similar
in there
I think you are wrong about that. But just a fine point and not
On 4/24/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
In the screen shot provided note that it appears grub is expecting an
intramfs and only lists those types of devices, rejecting both
(hd0,0) and /dev/sda3.
Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Aah, now I see. It's one of two things, and neither is your
grub.conf. That's the kernel spitting that garbage at you, so your
grub.conf is just fine. You have either:
1. Compiled in the need for an initrd and have not supplied one, or
2.
On Friday 25 April 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do you want to use an initrd, or due the highly customized thing
and dispense with it?
OK, let me explain a bit. I started compiling a kernel for this
install and somehow missed something important
Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Something seems to have changed with 2.6.25, more so than normal for new
versions. For instance, b43 refuses point blank to work here or do
anything remotely useful like a nice driver should. b43legacy doesn't
work either. They both work with earlier
On Friday 25 April 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, I'm thinking it probably won't do any real good to monkey around
with the kernel either, if the initramfs thing isn't the problem them
it seems likely to be a vista problem.
The kernel is exactly where you should be monkeying. I reckon you
Hi everybody,
Thanks for the replies.
I must change (hd1,4) to (hd0,4), however sda5 is my Suse's root partition.
Interesting.
2007/8/7, cscscscscs cscscscscs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi folk,
First of all sorry if my English is not perfect.
I become a little bit upset sucking installing Gentoo
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 09:12, cscscscscs cscscscscs wrote:
Hi everybody,
Thanks for the replies.
I must change (hd1,4) to (hd0,4), however sda5 is my Suse's root partition.
Interesting.
When the CMOS is run it jumps to the first drive MBR. Then it reads the boot
code there which
-Original Message-
From: Iain Buchanan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 9:26 AM
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: grub chainloader
I'm happy to leave the info vs man flamewar for someone else,
but what I _don't_ like is when
On Thursday 19 July 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'RE:
[gentoo-user] Re: grub chainloader':
I have seen many of them that the man page and the
info page were identicle. More often though it looked
like they made a decent man page, and coppied it to info.
info automatically pulls man
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Stroller wrote:
It's enough to make the
average person's head spin (and does) - it can easily take two
hours for me to get a class full of reasonably bright Windows
techies to grasp ...
You clearly have more experience than I do with teaching novices
about
Hi,
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:55:58 +0930 Iain Buchanan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm happy to leave the info vs man flamewar for someone else, but
what I _don't_ like is when you have both man and info, and one of
them is very deficient (in grub's case, man). The description is
different, less
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 13:36 +0200, Hans-Werner Hilse wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:55:58 +0930 Iain Buchanan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm happy to leave the info vs man flamewar for someone else, but
what I _don't_ like is when you have both man and info, and one of
them is very
On 18 Jul 2007, at 13:35, Etaoin Shrdlu wrote:
...
You can get everything at once and in the same place using the online
docs:
http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub.html
This manual is very excellent.
I believe you can also get it in PDF format - I printed it out over 3
years ago
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Stroller wrote:
On 18 Jul 2007, at 13:35, Etaoin Shrdlu wrote:
...
You can get everything at once and in the same place using the
online docs:
http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub.html
This manual is very excellent.
I believe you can also get it in
On Wednesday 18 July 2007 01:02, Iain Buchanan wrote:
On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 18:12 -0500, »Q« wrote:
In news:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Thufir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've read the GRUB documentation, but still don't understand why the
following worked:
[snip grub.conf]
I would've
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 07:53:45 +0100, Mick wrote:
If you have some reason not to mix one OS', or distro's boot files,
kernels, etc with another, plus if you want to try a different version
of grub then you can install grub separately in the new OS partition
(instead of the MBR) and chainload
On 18 Jul 2007, at 16:00, Alan McKinnon wrote:
...
I don't know. I think the overview is pretty clear http://
www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub.html#Overview, and leads into
the remainder of the documentation quite well.
... The big stumbling block is getting people to grasp that grub
is
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:06:57 +0100, Stroller wrote:
I have in the past considered putting grub.conf on a FAT32 partition
- I'm not 101% sure that'd work but I've never tried because I never
actually saw the usefulness.
It will work, provided you call the file menu.lst, because the GRUB
On 23:51 Tue 17 Jul, Thufir wrote:
Oh. Why was the grub documentation not understandable like that?
maybe I misread it. thanks for explaining!
I guess you missed it. `info grub' says (*Note chainloading)
---8---8
4.1.2 Load another boot loader to boot unsupported operating systems
On 7/18/07, Александър Л. Димитров [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23:51 Tue 17 Jul, Thufir wrote:
Oh. Why was the grub documentation not understandable like that?
maybe I misread it. thanks for explaining!
I guess you missed it. `info grub' says (*Note chainloading)
---8---8
4.1.2 Load
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 15:30 +0200, Александър Л. Димитров wrote:
On 23:51 Tue 17 Jul, Thufir wrote:
Oh. Why was the grub documentation not understandable like that?
maybe I misread it. thanks for explaining!
I guess you missed it. `info grub' says (*Note chainloading)
[snip]
Note
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 17:00 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
[snip]
I get a feel
that you are not an average person so your impressions are not valid
for them.
hahaha!! If you know who this mythical average person is, let me know
so we can pay her $$$ to test all of our software!!
;)
--
Iain
On 7/19/07, Iain Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Note that it's usually better to refer to the info command for more
serious documentation about GNU tools in general. RMS and his guys don't
exactly seem to like manpages that much that's what they have info for.
They have their point,
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Thufir wrote:
Oh. Why was the grub documentation not understandable like that?
maybe I misread it. thanks for explaining!
The grub man pages are, ahem, skimpy. IIRC it's all of three paragraphs.
The full story is in the info pages, but the way they are written
On Wednesday 18 July 2007 14:18, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Thufir wrote:
Oh. Why was the grub documentation not understandable like that?
maybe I misread it. thanks for explaining!
The grub man pages are, ahem, skimpy. IIRC it's all of three
paragraphs.
The full
Oh. Why was the grub documentation not understandable like that?
maybe I misread it. thanks for explaining!
-Thufir
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 18:12 -0500, »Q« wrote:
In news:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Thufir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've read the GRUB documentation, but still don't understand why the
following worked:
[snip grub.conf]
I would've thought that the chainloader +1 statement would be required
--
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Grub problems
On Sunday 29 October 2006 20:11, Joe Menola wrote:
On Sunday 29 October 2006 1:56 pm, Jeff Cranmer wrote:
Try running grub, then at the grub command line:
root (hd2,5)
setup /dev/sda
quit
Try setup (hd2)...also
Update.
After a little bit of surfing, I tried the command grub-install --recheck
/dev/sda
That changed the device map file so that the /dev/sda drive mapped to hd2
The full /boot/grub/device.map listing is now
(fd0) /dev/fd0
(hd0) /dev/hde
(hd1) /dev/hdh
(hd2) /dev/sda
I edited the
On Sunday 29 October 2006 1:22 pm, Jeff Cranmer wrote:
Update.
After a little bit of surfing, I tried the command grub-install --recheck
/dev/sda That changed the device map file so that the /dev/sda drive mapped
to hd2
The full /boot/grub/device.map listing is now
(fd0) /dev/fd0
(hd0)
I am trying to bring up a new Linux unit (my old desktop died on Thursday).
My hardware is an ASUS M2NPV-VM motherboard, running an Athlon X2 3800+ Dual
core processor.
I have a serial ATA 250GB hard drive which I am attempting to install my OS
into. The hard drive maps in the bios to SATA4,
On Sunday 29 October 2006 1:56 pm, Jeff Cranmer wrote:
Try running grub, then at the grub command line:
root (hd2,5)
setup /dev/sda
quit
-jm
When I run setup /dev/sda, I get the error
Error 11: Unrecognised device string
Try setup (hd2)...also I think the root command needs to be
On 10/29/06, Jeff Cranmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, since the real ordering of the drives during the boot cycle is /dev/hda
(the DVD drive) then /dev/sda, does that mean that the correct sequence is
(hd0) /dev/dvdrw
(hd1) /dev/sda
(hd2) /dev/hde
(hd3) /dev/hdh,
Nope. /dev/dvdrw isn't
On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 20:02 -0700, Richard Fish wrote:
snip
root (hd0,1)
title Gentoo Linux 2.6.16-gentoo-r13
kernel /kernel-2.6.16-gentoo-r13 root=/dev/hda6
snip
3. technically it is not title=foo, but title foo.
Strange thing is that the Handbook actually has title=foo in its GRUB
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 00:57:31 + (UTC), James wrote:
Why didn't the old syntax work? (separate partition for /boot)
kernel /kernel-2.6.16-gentoo-r13
When it worked from the command line of grub?
Probably because you had a space after root on the command line, but not
in grub.conf. If you'd
Neil Bothwick neil at digimed.co.uk writes:
Why didn't the old syntax work? (separate partition for /boot)
kernel /kernel-2.6.16-gentoo-r13
When it worked from the command line of grub?
Probably because you had a space after root on the command line, but not
in grub.conf. If you'd told
Richard Fish bigfish at asmallpond.org writes:
looks good, but try this:
kernel (hd0,1)/boot/vmlinuz root=/dev/hda6
Actually since you have a separate /boot filesystem, it would be more
accurate to use:
kernel (hd0,1)/vmlinuz root=/dev/hda6
Yes both work. as well as what I decided to
On 7/20/06, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why didn't the old syntax work? (separate partition for /boot)
kernel /kernel-2.6.16-gentoo-r13
When it worked from the command line of grub?
To be honest, I'm not sure. Can you try something like this:
root (hd0,1)
title Gentoo Linux
101 - 155 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
