On Freitag 10 April 2009, Daiajo Tibdixious wrote:
> This is a new system, I've never manged to start X yet at all.
>
> Initially I had lots of (failed to load module) errors for various
> modules, & "module ABI major version (1) doesn't match the server's
> version (4)"
>
> got rid of all of the "
This is a new system, I've never manged to start X yet at all.
Initially I had lots of (failed to load module) errors for various
modules, & "module ABI major version (1) doesn't match the server's
version (4)"
got rid of all of the "failed to load module" errors & turned the ABI
error into a war
Duncan wrote:
Did you try md-mod,start_dirty_degraded=1 (AFAIK this applies to
RAID-4/5/6 only)?
No
What about listing the appropriate component devices, as so:
md=d1,/dev/sda1,/dev/sdb1,/dev/sdc1... ?
Yes. I had it by default. Without it never seemed to work.
With it, it worked _so
flockm...@gmx.at posted 200904092105.19617.flockm...@gmx.at, excerpted
below, on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 21:05:19 +0200:
>> Regardless, most firmware RAIDs can be
>> configured JBOD and run with the more standard md/mdp kernel RAID
>> anyway.
>>
>>
> this is only true for raids with the old 0.90 superbl
Branko Badrljica posted
49de51a0.7010...@avtomatika.com, excerpted below, on Thu, 09 Apr 2009
21:50:56 +0200:
>> Yes, for LVM, no, for RAID, at least md/mdp kernel RAID.
> In theory, yes. In practice, it is unpredictable and flakey. I lost more
> than a day with a system that used to be able to
On Thursday 09 April 2009 20:36:37 Duncan wrote:
> Branko Badrljica posted
> 49de4433.3010...@avtomatika.com, excerpted below, on Thu, 09 Apr 2009
>
> 20:53:39 +0200:
> > I need initramfs to be able to boot from RAID. Same for LVM.
>
> Yes, for LVM, no, for RAID, at least md/mdp kernel RAID. DM b
Duncan wrote:
Yes, for LVM, no, for RAID, at least md/mdp kernel RAID.
In theory, yes. In practice, it is unpredictable and flakey.
I lost more than a day with a system that used to be able to
autoassemble the RAID in kernel and boot it and then simply "changed its
mind" and no matter what I
Branko Badrljica posted
49de4433.3010...@avtomatika.com, excerpted below, on Thu, 09 Apr 2009
20:53:39 +0200:
> I need initramfs to be able to boot from RAID. Same for LVM.
Yes, for LVM, no, for RAID, at least md/mdp kernel RAID. DM based
firmware RAID is different, and not something I'd trust
Duncan wrote:
No initramfs seriously decomplicates things.
But who am I to say? It's your system, not mine. It's worth considering
tho.
I need initramfs to be able to boot from RAID. Same for LVM.
It is also useful for uvesafb. Uvesafb driver is finally the one that
gives me nice hi
- Original Message -
From: "Duncan" <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net>
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2009 1:36 PM
Subject: [gentoo-amd64] Re: grub and maximum kernel file size
flockm...@gmx.at posted 200904091859.12109.flockm...@gmx.at, excerpted
below, on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 18:59:11 +0200:
th
flockm...@gmx.at posted 200904091859.12109.flockm...@gmx.at, excerpted
below, on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 18:59:11 +0200:
> thanks for the answer, i'm already running grub-0.97-r9. perhaps it is
> time to switch back to good old lilo, or to play with grub2 ;)
I don't know then. Did you check the bugs m
flockm...@gmx.at wrote:
thanks for the answer, i'm already running grub-0.97-r9.
perhaps it is time to switch back to good old lilo, or to play with grub2 ;)
Or perhaps not. I have 12+ MB kernels ( with internal initramfs for v86d
and modules ) and external initramfs loaded with grub w
On Thursday 09 April 2009 08:45:30 Duncan wrote:
> flockm...@gmx.at posted 200904090657.08422.flockm...@gmx.at, excerpted
>
> below, on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 06:57:08 +0200:
> > i have a quite big initramfs, kernel size is approx. 5,7 MB. Adding new
> > things to my initramfs does not work, because gru
13 matches
Mail list logo