Hi,
Samuel Thibault wrote:
Did you try to put a linux partition on this box too? The idea would be
to check whether its grub has the same kind of issue.
no, not yet. Btw, they are two boxes now! The HDD is not big enough. But
I could try on another HDD temporarily, perhaps the best bet would b
Hello,
Did you try to put a linux partition on this box too? The idea would be
to check whether its grub has the same kind of issue.
Samuel
Hello,
Quoting Riccardo Mottola (2014-12-04 17:44:28)
> Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> > I installed everything on a "host" machine (same architecture as my
> > target box, just more ram and more Mhz). I end up with something
> > bootable!
> > However if I put the disk in my original box, it just kee
Hi,
Riccardo Mottola wrote:
Hi,
I installed everything on a "host" machine (same architecture as my
target box, just more ram and more Mhz). I end up with something
bootable!
However if I put the disk in my original box, it just keeps rebooting,
I don't even get the grub screen. Thus I suppo
Hi,
On 05/02/13 01:47, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Hello,
The latest commit in gnumach should be fixing the disasters that some
people have been seeing in their hurd system. This was due to an
improper handling of non-block-aligned reads in the gnumach linux block
glue, which happens only if partiti
On Thu, 2013-05-02 at 23:52 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Thu 02 May 2013 12:14:46 +0200, a écrit :
> > On Thu, 2013-05-02 at 01:47 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> But I guess you were still running the old kernel while doing this?
>
> You need to reboot with the new kernel t
Svante Signell, le Thu 02 May 2013 12:14:46 +0200, a écrit :
> On Thu, 2013-05-02 at 01:47 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > The latest commit in gnumach should be fixing the disasters that some
> > people have been seeing in their hurd system. This was due to an
> > improper handling of non-block-
On Thu, 2013-05-02 at 01:47 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The latest commit in gnumach should be fixing the disasters that some
> people have been seeing in their hurd system. This was due to an
> improper handling of non-block-aligned reads in the gnumach linux block
> glue, which ha
On Thu, 2013-05-02 at 01:47 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The latest commit in gnumach should be fixing the disasters that some
> people have been seeing in their hurd system. This was due to an
> improper handling of non-block-aligned reads in the gnumach linux block
> glue, which ha
Samuel Thibault wrote:
Riccardo Mottola, le Sat 19 May 2012 16:13:19 +0200, a écrit :
while configuring/installing grub-pc from debian, the kernel panics in the
way attached in the screenshot.
I don't see anything obvious, from the source code the assertion should
never trigger, so it might jus
Riccardo Mottola, le Sat 19 May 2012 16:13:19 +0200, a écrit :
> while configuring/installing grub-pc from debian, the kernel panics in the
> way attached in the screenshot.
I don't see anything obvious, from the source code the assertion should
never trigger, so it might just be some overflow som
Riccardo Mottola, le Sat 19 May 2012 16:13:19 +0200, a écrit :
> while configuring/installing grub-pc from debian, the kernel panics in the
> way attached in the screenshot.
which version of the kernel are you running exactly?
Samuel
olafbuddenha...@gmx.net, le Wed 11 Nov 2009 00:23:17 +0100, a écrit :
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 10:47:08PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>
> > - Either we align more on POSIX to manage to get the st_dev (aka fsid)
> > of filesystems equal to the the st_rdev of their underlying /dev
> > entries. A
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 10:47:08PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> - Either we align more on POSIX to manage to get the st_dev (aka fsid)
> of filesystems equal to the the st_rdev of their underlying /dev
> entries. An easy way is to have storeios expose their own pid as
> st_rdev, and have
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 02:01:19PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > I assumed that was the case for the ones that are interesting for grub.
>
> Yes, but then to realize unicity it's more difficult, as you have
> several sources of IDs. You can of course use a prefix to identify where
> it comes f
Carl Fredrik Hammar, le Tue 10 Nov 2009 13:30:30 +0100, a écrit :
> > That's not a problem since in that case the FS above it will have to be
> > restarted too. Note that a storeio can't time out while an FS is still
> > running.
>
> The FS can use file_get_storage_info and use the store directly,
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:24:34AM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Carl Fredrik Hammar, le Tue 10 Nov 2009 09:27:14 +0100, a écrit :
> > > - An easy way is to have storeios expose their own pid as
> > > st_rdev, and have filesystems use the underlying storeio st_rdev for
> > > their st_dev (aka
Carl Fredrik Hammar, le Tue 10 Nov 2009 09:27:14 +0100, a écrit :
> > - An easy way is to have storeios expose their own pid as
> > st_rdev, and have filesystems use the underlying storeio st_rdev for
> > their st_dev (aka fsid). One issue is for the / ext2fs, since it
> > doesn't use a stor
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 10:47:08PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> I can see two solutions:
>
> - Either we align more on POSIX to manage to get the st_dev (aka
> fsid) of filesystems equal to the the st_rdev of their underlying /dev
> entries. An easy way is to have storeios expose thei
Samuel Thibault wrote:
Barry deFreese, le Sun 31 May 2009 10:03:32 -0400, a écrit :
Even if I run the unmodified version I get segfaults with the
following error on the console:
end_request: I/O error, dev 02:00, sector 0
Any clue on what could be causing that?
Doesn't gdb give you a
Barry deFreese, le Sun 31 May 2009 10:03:32 -0400, a écrit :
> Even if I run the unmodified version I get segfaults with the
> following error on the console:
>
> end_request: I/O error, dev 02:00, sector 0
>
> Any clue on what could be causing that?
Doesn't gdb give you a backtrace?
Samuel
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 08:15:53PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So, why doesn't it install a boot loader?
I think this probably because it uses an obsolete code base which never
did install Grub when installing GNU/Linux, either.
Adding this feature would still be welcome, but probably not t
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 07:57:06PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> You then need to explain that to your mailer for properly setting the
> Mail-Followup-To: header.
Indeed.
> > > Correct, you can't install GRUB from within a GNU/Hurd system,
> > But the rescue CD is running GNU/Linux...?
>
> Yes
[EMAIL PROTECTED], le Wed 21 Mar 2007 19:46:49 +0100, a écrit :
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 03:37:16PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> > [Taking this to .]
>
> No need to CC me, I happen to be subscribed :)
You then need to explain that to your mailer for properly setting the
Mail-Followup-To: h
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 03:37:16PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> [Taking this to .]
No need to CC me, I happen to be subscribed :)
> Correct, you can't install GRUB from within a GNU/Hurd system,
But the rescue CD is running GNU/Linux...?
Leslie
--
NEW homepage: https://viridian.dnsalias
Thomas Schwinge, le Wed 21 Mar 2007 15:37:16 +0100, a écrit :
> It's probably no longer worthwhile to do that for GRUB legacy,
Maybe as a debian patch at least.
Samuel
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
Bug-hurd@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bu
configfile (nd)/boot/hurd-l4/menu.lst
Problem with that is that you can't share that file with `boot', which
is quite a nice thing IMHO.
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
Bug-hurd@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
> Have you tried that? I'm not sure it actually works, but I'm not sure it
> doesn't. I think I tried it and it wasn't the right thing, but I don't
> really recall at the moment.
From my understanding of what your patch is supposed to do, yes and it
works quite well for me. Specifically, I have
> > With this, we put the canonical script into /boot/servers.boot and instead
> > of everyone's grub config file copying the magic command lines, they just
> > use:
> >
> > kernel /boot/gnumach
> > modulelist /boot/servers.boot
>
> Why can'y you use the configfile directive? Wouldn't that do th
> With this, we put the canonical script into /boot/servers.boot and instead
> of everyone's grub config file copying the magic command lines, they just
> use:
>
> kernel /boot/gnumach
> modulelist /boot/servers.boot
Why can'y you use the configfile directive? Wouldn't that do the same
thing (wi
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Has anyone used grub2? Is it usable yet?
>
>It is not usable yet.
>
> When we spoke sometime ago you said the exact opposite. Has something
> changed in the GRUB 2 code base?
*sigh*, if someone would pick on nuances it would've been you,
> Has anyone used grub2? Is it usable yet?
It is not usable yet.
When we spoke sometime ago you said the exact opposite. Has something
changed in the GRUB 2 code base?
We planned scripting support for GRUB 2. What I had in mind was
just a GRUB 2 script for the Hurd. The script ac
> It is not usable yet.
>
> We planned scripting support for GRUB 2. What I had in mind was just
> a GRUB 2 script for the Hurd.
That sounds great. But since it is not a reality for users who are not
themselves hacking on GRUB 2, I would still like to make things easier on
people who want to ha
Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Has anyone used grub2? Is it usable yet?
It is not usable yet.
We planned scripting support for GRUB 2. What I had in mind was just
a GRUB 2 script for the Hurd. The script accepts the root device as
argument and loads the right kernel and modules.
2004-09-15 Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
You just couldn't sit and suck on this lollipop any longer huh?
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
Bug-hurd@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
> > I only changed the behaviour of savedefault when executed within the
> > GRUB-util shell (ie. not GRUB menu mode). I can't think of a scenario
> > where the '--once' semantics would be useful to access from the GRUB
> > menu, so I'm reluctant to 'fix' this behaviour.
>
> I think there's a miss
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:44:21PM +, Keir Fraser wrote:
>
> I only changed the behaviour of savedefault when executed within the
> GRUB-util shell (ie. not GRUB menu mode). I can't think of a scenario
> where the '--once' semantics would be useful to access from the GRUB
> menu, so I'm reluct
> I only changed the behaviour of savedefault when executed within the
> GRUB-util shell (ie. not GRUB menu mode). I can't think of a scenario
> where the '--once' semantics would be useful to access from the GRUB
> menu, so I'm reluctant to 'fix' this behaviour.
>
> One other limitation you shou
> I gave a try to your patch for 'lilo -R' functionality in GRUB:
>
> http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-grub/2002-02/msg00151.html
>
> it seems to basicaly work, but the --once flag is not honored when running
> the real grub (I don't know if the problem is in savedefault or in the
> boot r
Hi folks,
I have rerun the test below twice with the following solution and learned
something interesting. It is possible to enter e2fs_stage1_5 and use
menu.lst by using the following method. As it works now it is not possible
to install GRUB in the hd0 with stage1, stage2, e2fs_stage1_5 and men
40 matches
Mail list logo
