On Tue, 3 May 2005, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > > > in my experience, if you do not mount /mnt/dev from the initrd, you get > > > a message saying that it was unable to write to /dev/console.. > > upon further consideration, i think the reason it fails to write to > /dev/console is that the nfs filesystem is mounted read-only.
I thought this too at first. However I did some experiments... Here is a transcript (with some comments added) from a readonly mounted (infact exported "ro,no_root_squash") nfsroot that was booted using initrd-netboot-tools: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/dev# uname -a Linux dipper2 2.4.27-2-686-smp #1 SMP Thu Jan 20 11:02:39 JST 2005 i686 GNU/Linux [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# cd /dev [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/dev# touch fred touch: cannot touch `fred': Permission denied [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/dev# cat /dev/console djkghldfg #<input from keyboard djkghldfg #<echoed back lhfsglkjh #<input from keyboard lhfsglkjh #<echoed back [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/dev# echo hello >/dev/console hello [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/dev# mount rootfs on / type rootfs (rw) aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd:/var/netboot/deb31boot on / type nfs (rw,v3,rsize=8192,wsi ze=8192,hard,udp,nolock,addr=aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd) > even though there is a full /dev tree there (created by debootstrap, i > think), each terminal needs it's own /dev tree... hence the use of devfs > (or possibly udev). Hmm... I'm still not sure that each terminal needs it's own /dev/ or that /dev/ needs to be on a read/write fs. I think my transcript proves otherwise. > not everyone does read-only nfsroot filesystems, so making it optional > seems like a simple alternative in the meantime... I agree that making it optional keeps everyone happy!!! Regards Alex Owen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
