Hi!

package: lilo
version: any (last tested from last "testing" CD netinst image)
Debian: "testing"

I have tried to use lilo for booting from different ways without
any success. The symptoms are always the same.

Ways I tried:

1. Installing the system manually via debootstrap, etc ...
Then used aptitude to install lilo.

2. Normal netinst
Then used apt-get install or aptitude to install lilo.
GRUB worked fine.

3. expert mode install asking (last step) for lilo installation instead
of grub.

4. Used lilo from another system creating an entry for the debian system
in /etc/lilo.conf (included initrd.img).

5. Installed a new kernel-image.

Symptom (for all previous atempts):

The image of the kernel seems to be correctly loaded but
ends up repeating 4 or 5 times (cannot remember exactly) the following
message:

request-module: runaway loop modprobe binfmt-464c

Any help?

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 01:34:50 +0000, Paulo da Silva
<psXdaXsilva@esotericaX.ptX> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> package: lilo
> version: any (last tested from last "testing" CD netinst image)
> Debian: "testing"
>
> I have tried to use lilo for booting from different ways without
> any success. The symptoms are always the same.
>
> Ways I tried:
>
> 1. Installing the system manually via debootstrap, etc ...
> Then used aptitude to install lilo.
>
> 2. Normal netinst
> Then used apt-get install or aptitude to install lilo.
> GRUB worked fine.
>
Why are you trying to install lilo if grub works?


--
Term, holidays, term, holidays, till we leave school, and then work, work,
work till we die.
-- C.S. Lewis

Bill Marcum wrote:
....

>
> Why are you trying to install lilo if grub works?

Because I always used lilo. I am currently using lilo
and I don't feel comfortable to migrate
to a distribution that does not
boot with lilo (!) without understanding why.
I don't want to change my running systems.
Besides, when you install lilo, it says everything
went fine! But does not work ...

The question should be "Why not using lilo?".

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 01:34:50 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:

> Hi!
>
> package: lilo
> version: any (last tested from last "testing" CD netinst image) Debian:
> "testing"
>
> I have tried to use lilo for booting from different ways without any
> success. The symptoms are always the same.
> [...]

I'm using lilo to boot up without any problems. The thing is, I compiled
the kernel from source and installed it (and its modules). I'm not using
the debian kernel image.

I installed the kernel-source-2.4.27, copied it to my home directory, read
the README.* files in the kernel source directory and compiled and
installed the kernel the traditional linux way.

Then I configured /etc/lilo.conf with information about my new kernel's
location and ran lilo.

I come from Slackware where things are more often done the "core linux way."

Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 01:34:50 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:
....

> I installed the kernel-source-2.4.27, copied it to my home directory, read
> the README.* files in the kernel source directory and compiled and
> installed the kernel the traditional linux way.
>
> Then I configured /etc/lilo.conf with information about my new kernel's
> location and ran lilo.
>
> I come from Slackware where things are more often done the "core linux way."
I am currently running gentoo. I also used to compile the kernel that
way.
The reason I am trying another distribution is the time consuming to
compile the programs. gentoo is an excelent distribution and, being
compiled locally, very performant. But it takes to much time for
simple upgrades.

Anyway, I am trying also to compile the sources but using the debian way
as reported in
http://www.falkotimme.com/howtos/deb...el2.6_compile/

BTW, how did you manage the initrd stuff? Did you just skip it?

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:21:59 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:

> [...]
> The reason I am trying another distribution is the time consuming to
> compile the programs. gentoo is an excelent distribution and, being
> compiled locally, very performant. But it takes to much time for
> simple upgrades.
>
> Anyway, I am trying also to compile the sources but using the debian way
> as reported in
> http://www.falkotimme.com/howtos/deb...el2.6_compile/
>
> BTW, how did you manage the initrd stuff? Did you just skip it?

Yes, I skipped the initrd. I never figured out how to get an initrd
working, and initrd is not really needed as long as the "important" stuff
is compiled directly into the kernel.

Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:21:59 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:
>
>
>>[...]
>>The reason I am trying another distribution is the time consuming to
>>compile the programs. gentoo is an excelent distribution and, being
>>compiled locally, very performant. But it takes to much time for
>>simple upgrades.
>>
>>Anyway, I am trying also to compile the sources but using the debian way
>>as reported in
>>http://www.falkotimme.com/howtos/deb...el2.6_compile/
>>
>>BTW, how did you manage the initrd stuff? Did you just skip it?
>
>
> Yes, I skipped the initrd. I never figured out how to get an initrd
> working, and initrd is not really needed as long as the "important" stuff
> is compiled directly into the kernel.
>

That's what I did and now everything is running fine.
Compiling the kernel debian way did not work either!
I think initrd images generated, at least for the "testing"
version, are broken.
Hopefully someone from devel. have a word about this ...
I reported a bug anyway ...

Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:21:59 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:
>
>
>>[...]
>>The reason I am trying another distribution is the time consuming to
>>compile the programs. gentoo is an excelent distribution and, being
>>compiled locally, very performant. But it takes to much time for
>>simple upgrades.
>>
>>Anyway, I am trying also to compile the sources but using the debian way
>>as reported in
>>http://www.falkotimme.com/howtos/deb...el2.6_compile/
>>
>>BTW, how did you manage the initrd stuff? Did you just skip it?
>
>
> Yes, I skipped the initrd. I never figured out how to get an initrd
> working, and initrd is not really needed as long as the "important" stuff
> is compiled directly into the kernel.
>

That's what I did and now everything is running fine.
Compiling the kernel debian way did not work either!
I think initrd images generated, at least for the "testing"
version, are broken.
Hopefully someone from devel. have a word about this ...
I reported a bug anyway ...

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:32:46 +0000, Paulo da Silva wrote:

> [...]
> I think initrd images generated, at least for the "testing"
> version, are broken.
> Hopefully someone from devel. have a word about this ...
> I reported a bug anyway ...

I'm using stable, and I wasn't able to get it working. Maybe Debian needs
an initrd faq.

It would be interesting if I could peek around in the initrd image by
loop-mounting it, but I don't know what filesystem type is used for it.

Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
....

>
> It would be interesting if I could peek around in the initrd image by
> loop-mounting it, but I don't know what filesystem type is used for it.
>

I can help you about this ...
About debian initrd images you can extract its contenta as follow:

gzip -dc initrd.img > initrd
cpio -idv < initrd

or

gzip -dc initrd.img | cpio -idv

Unfortunately, when I tryed to reverse these steps (see info cpio)
I did not get a working image. May be I made some mistake or I
should have used mkinitrd.
Anyway I did not take a sgnificant amount of time
hacking this thing ...

An approach to follow is to look at the way debian utils build
the image, where they get its contents from.

If you have time to spend with this and reach any conclusion, I would
be pleased to hear from you.

Regards
Paulo