> > lilo.conf
> > ---
> > disk=/dev/md0
> > # fdisk of hda
> > bios=0x80
> > sectors=63
> > heads=16
> > cylinders=39770
> > partition=/dev/md1
> > # from fdisk -ul -- starts at block 408
> ^ you probably mean cylinder :)
> > start=410256
> >
> > boot=/dev/hda
> >
"Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> lilo.conf
> ---
> disk=/dev/md0
> # fdisk of hda
> bios=0x80
> sectors=63
> heads=16
> cylinders=39770
> partition=/dev/md1
> # from fdisk -ul -- starts at block 408
^ you probably mean cylinder :)
>
Martin Bene wrote:
> You CAN make lilo boot off raid1, you just have to supply all the
> info it normaly gets from getgeometry() in the config file.
Just to reiterate (again)
*OR* you can use the lilo.raid1 patch included in the SRPM of lilo
in RH 6.1
James
--
Miscellaneous Engineer --- IBM N
Michael wrote and now answers his own question
Went back to Harald's original e-mail on the subject and
re-configured the partitions - it appears to all work now.
In the example below, the first raid partition does not begin at the
physical disk start, changing that allows lilo to recognize the
Martin Bene wrote:
> let me repeat
> something I learned from Harald Nordgard-Hansen
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (Thanks!!):
>
> You CAN make lilo boot off raid1, you just have to supply all the
> info it normaly gets from getgeometry() in the config file.
>
This is what I have
/ /dev/md
At 19:54 20.09.99 +1000, Glenn McGrath wrote:
>none of the above can point to a file residing on a md device, if it does
>lilo gives the device not known error.
Since it still doesn't seem to be common knowledge, let me repeat something
I learned from Harald Nordgård-Hansen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (
What i realise now is that the lilo.conf file cant make any reference at all
to ANY files on a md device.
install=
map=
image=
none of the above can point to a file residing on a md device, if it does
lilo gives the device not known error.
I probably should have realised this before now, but th
Does anyone know how GRUB would go as an alternative to lilo for booting
root raid partitions?
Ive heard its fairly flexible, but seems pretty complex to me, i tried
getting it working, but never really understood it. Stage 1, 1.5 2 etc...
But if this complexity makes it flexible it may be worth
Luca Berra wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 19, 1999 at 11:31:45AM -0400, James Manning wrote:
> > This is something I never quite understood... why wouldn't lilo just
> > blindly write to the mbr of /dev/md0? Let the s/w raid code handle
> > putting that on the mirrors *shrug*... Is it as simple as having
On Sun, Sep 19, 1999 at 11:31:45AM -0400, James Manning wrote:
> This is something I never quite understood... why wouldn't lilo just
> blindly write to the mbr of /dev/md0? Let the s/w raid code handle
> putting that on the mirrors *shrug*... Is it as simple as having lilo
> check the block majo
[ Sunday, September 19, 1999 ] Harald Milz wrote:
> Egon Eckert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It works. 0x901 should work too, I think. :-)
>
> Will it automatically boot from the second harddisk if the first one is
> broke? This may be a dumb question but I didn't follow the development for
>
Thanks for the advice people.
I now have a 64MB boot/emergency partition that ive actually put a mini
debian distribution on, so i can copy my linux boot files into there and
update lilo from there.
I was trying to set boot=/dev/md0 which i realise now doesnt work (thanks
for pointing that one o
> If i try and put root=/dev/md1 in lilo.conf then i get the error device
> 0x0900 not known.
There's my lilo.conf line:
root=0x900
It works. 0x901 should work too, I think. :-)
Egon
> Ive got my raid0 botting however i havent managed to get lilo to boot it.
>
> To boot it i boot normally and at the prompt i enter linux root=/dev/md1
>
> If i try and put root=/dev/md1 in lilo.conf then i get the error device
> 0x0900 not known.
There should be no problem putting "root=/dev/md
14 matches
Mail list logo
