SEO

Hi y'all,

I just installed Slackware 10.2. Installation was fine, i chose
the test26.s kernel, but no bootloader, coz i can't stand lilo. After
restart i booted Slack CD1 again (boot: test26.s root=/dev/sda2
noinitrd ro) and installed all the necessary packages from CDs 2 & 3
(kernel sources/modules/headers and grub). Then I ran grubconfig, which

is an automated tool to install grub. I also tried grub-install, but
this one only left me with commandline upon boot. Grubconfig was much
better, the menu appeared, and somewhat more than a screen (with
framebuffer) of messages passed by when it happened:

VFS: Cannot open root device "sda2" or unknown-block (0,0)
Please append a correct "root=" boot option
Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on
unknown-block (0,0)

Now what's all this drivel supposed to mean? /dev/sda2 is my sata hard
drive partition, formatted to reiserfs. Booting with such parameter
from CD worked ok, not to mention countless number of distros who
managed it before. I even made an initrd, only to see the panic message

again. For curious, this is an excerpt from the automatically generated

menu.lst, with a manually added initrd option:

# Other bootable partition config begins
title Windows on (/dev/sda1)
rootnoverify (hd0,0)
makeactive
chainloader +1
# Other bootable partition config ends
# Linux bootable partition config begins
title Slackware on (/dev/sda2)
root (hd0,1)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz root=/dev/sda2 initrd=/boot/initrd.gz ro vga=790

# Linux bootable partition config ends

I'd welcome any advice. Please help me if you can. TIA

Mahy

On Fri, 12 May 2006 15:16:12 -0700, Mahy wrote:

> Hi y'all,
>
> I just installed Slackware 10.2. Installation was fine, i chose
> the test26.s kernel, but no bootloader, coz i can't stand lilo. After
> restart i booted Slack CD1 again (boot: test26.s root=/dev/sda2
> noinitrd ro) and installed all the necessary packages from CDs 2 & 3
> (kernel sources/modules/headers and grub). Then I ran grubconfig, which
>
> is an automated tool to install grub. I also tried grub-install, but
> this one only left me with commandline upon boot. Grubconfig was much
> better, the menu appeared, and somewhat more than a screen (with
> framebuffer) of messages passed by when it happened:
>
> VFS: Cannot open root device "sda2" or unknown-block (0,0)
> Please append a correct "root=" boot option
> Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on
> unknown-block (0,0)
>
> Now what's all this drivel supposed to mean? /dev/sda2 is my sata hard
> drive partition, formatted to reiserfs. Booting with such parameter
> from CD worked ok, not to mention countless number of distros who
> managed it before. I even made an initrd, only to see the panic message
>
> again. For curious, this is an excerpt from the automatically generated
>
> menu.lst, with a manually added initrd option:
>
> # Other bootable partition config begins
> title Windows on (/dev/sda1)
> rootnoverify (hd0,0)
> makeactive
> chainloader +1
> # Other bootable partition config ends
> # Linux bootable partition config begins
> title Slackware on (/dev/sda2)
> root (hd0,1)
> kernel /boot/vmlinuz root=/dev/sda2 initrd=/boot/initrd.gz ro vga=790
>
> # Linux bootable partition config ends
>
> I'd welcome any advice. Please help me if you can. TIA
>
> Mahy
>
Q.1. Is the grub boot menu displayed?

General advice:
Verify that the directory /boot/grub exists and contains the "stage
files." If you have installed Slackware's grub package, you might still
need to copy the files:

mkdir /boot/grub
cp /usr/lib/grub/i386-pc/* /boot/grub

I prefer using the grub shell to setup grub directly. That way, I can see
if there are any errors. After copying the stage files (as shown above),
do this:

# grub --no-floppy
grub> root (hd0,1)
grub> setup (hd0)
grub> quit

Watch for any error messages while in the grub shell.
This installs grub at the MBR and you can load XP with the stanza you have
shown.

The menu.lst you have looks fine, that is, if you don't have a boot
partition. The designation of sda2 as root must be because you are using a
SATA controller. The initrd may need to be on a separate line (but, maybe
not.) I use the syntax like this:

#Begin menu.lst
title Windows on (/dev/sda1)
rootnoverify (hd0,0)
makeactive
chainloader +1

title Slackware on (/dev/sda2)
root (hd0,1)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz root=/dev/sda2 ro vga=790
initrd /boot/initrd.gz
#End menu.lst

This assumes you have created an initrd.gz with the appropriate modules to
boot (man mkinitrd). If your initrd is not being loaded, then that would
account for not being able to see sda2 (yet). Try the syntax like I show
above.


--
Douglas Mayne

Douglas Mayne wrote:
> Q.1. Is the grub boot menu displayed?

Of course, I think I mentioned it ...

>
> General advice:
> Verify that the directory /boot/grub exists and contains the "stage
> files." If you have installed Slackware's grub package, you might still
> need to copy the files:
>

The "grub-install" and "grubconfig" did it for me. Everything's there.

> I prefer using the grub shell to setup grub directly. That way, I can see
> if there are any errors. After copying the stage files (as shown above),
> do this:
>
> # grub --no-floppy
> grub> root (hd0,1)
> grub> setup (hd0)
> grub> quit
>

Alrite, i'll try it out.

>
> The menu.lst you have looks fine, that is, if you don't have a boot
> partition. The designation of sda2 as root must be because you are using a
> SATA controller. The initrd may need to be on a separate line (but, maybe
> not.) I use the syntax like this:
>
> #Begin menu.lst
> title Windows on (/dev/sda1)
> rootnoverify (hd0,0)
> makeactive
> chainloader +1
>
> title Slackware on (/dev/sda2)
> root (hd0,1)
> kernel /boot/vmlinuz root=/dev/sda2 ro vga=790
> initrd /boot/initrd.gz
> #End menu.lst
>

Again, i'll try it out and let you know.

> This assumes you have created an initrd.gz with the appropriate modules to
> boot (man mkinitrd). If your initrd is not being loaded, then that would
> account for not being able to see sda2 (yet). Try the syntax like I show
> above.
>

Well, if initrd not being loaded is the cause of not recognizing
/dev/sda2, then why not put it right after the "kernel" command? The
sooner the better, eh? Ok, I promise I'll try everything. Hey, what
about downloading a newer and richer kernel (in terms of hw support)?

Mahy

Ok, i did everything, but it didn't help. However, i noticed a few
peculiarities. I gave you last 3 messages, now i give you another three
ones (they appear immediately before those previously published ones):

VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem)
/boot/initrd.gz: loading kernel modules from initrd image:
Using /lib/modules/2.6.13/reiserfs.ko

Why is it mounting root with ext2fs?? Anyway, is this supposed to be
the much-hailed fast and stable Slack? Folks, i've done literally
nothing wrong (there was no time), and i can't even get it to boot

Mahy wrote:
> Ok, i did everything, but it didn't help. However, i noticed a few
> peculiarities. I gave you last 3 messages, now i give you another three
> ones (they appear immediately before those previously published ones):
>
> VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem)
> /boot/initrd.gz: loading kernel modules from initrd image:
> Using /lib/modules/2.6.13/reiserfs.ko
>
> Why is it mounting root with ext2fs?? Anyway, is this supposed to be
> the much-hailed fast and stable Slack? Folks, i've done literally
> nothing wrong (there was no time), and i can't even get it to boot
>

Slack with LILO just works most of the time. I wanted to try to help you
when you first posted, but since I know almost nothing about Grub, I
couldn't, but now you mention that you might have an initrd problem.

Lots of people have problems with initrds. I suggest that you build a
kernel with support for all the things you need built-in and use modules
for everything else.

That means that your HD controller chipset, HD controller bus and
filesystem type would be compiled directly into the kernel, and you
wouldn't need an initrd.

Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote:
> Lots of people have problems with initrds. I suggest that you build a
> kernel with support for all the things you need built-in and use modules
> for everything else.
>
> That means that your HD controller chipset, HD controller bus and
> filesystem type would be compiled directly into the kernel, and you
> wouldn't need an initrd.

First of all, thanks for your helpfulness. Well, i did a kernel
compilation few times already, but i decided it's not how i wanna spend
my time. Do you think it might help if I downloaded and installed the
newer (2.6.16.9) kernel from some Slackware mirror? Moreover, you say
lots of people have problems with initrd. Then has someone bothered to
compile an enriched kernel and post it somewhere? I hope this isn't
contrary to Slack's philosophy...

Mahy wrote:
>
> First of all, thanks for your helpfulness. Well, i did a kernel
> compilation few times already, but i decided it's not how i wanna spend
> my time.

I know what you mean. Even though I've been compiling 2.4.x kernels for
years, I was overwhelmed by the number of options needed for the 2.6.16
kernel. It took me five hours to configure it.

One good thing is that once you have a working kernel (from a working
..config file), you can just re-use that file when compiling new kernels.
You use "make oldconfig" to re-use an old .config file.

> Do you think it might help if I downloaded and installed the
> newer (2.6.16.9) kernel from some Slackware mirror? Moreover, you say
> lots of people have problems with initrd. Then has someone bothered to
> compile an enriched kernel and post it somewhere? I hope this isn't
> contrary to Slack's philosophy...
>

It's not against Slack philosophy to have pre-compiled kernels. In fact,
the Slack cds have some compiled, generic kernels on them, but when
those do not suffice, slackers generally compile their own.

I wouldn't trust myself to be able to create a binary kernel for someone
else. That's something that has to be done right, and I don't have the
skills to determine if a kernel I've built is generic enough. Plus, it
might leak personal information.

Mahy <jkotuc@gmail.com> trolled:
> Hi y'all,

> I just installed Slackware 10.2. Installation was fine, i chose
> the test26.s kernel, but no bootloader, coz i can't stand lilo. After
> restart i booted Slack CD1 again (boot: test26.s root=/dev/sda2
> noinitrd ro) and installed all the necessary packages from CDs 2 & 3
> (kernel sources/modules/headers and grub). Then I ran grubconfig, which

> is an automated tool to install grub. I also tried grub-install, but
> this one only left me with commandline upon boot. Grubconfig was much
> better, the menu appeared, and somewhat more than a screen (with
> framebuffer) of messages passed by when it happened:

> VFS: Cannot open root device "sda2" or unknown-block (0,0)
> Please append a correct "root=" boot option
> Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on
> unknown-block (0,0)

> Now what's all this drivel supposed to mean?

It means you should have used lilo.

cordially, as always,

rm

Realto Margarino wrote:
> It means you should have used lilo.
>
> cordially, as always,
>
> rm

I just tried it with lilo (set it up using liloconfig) only o please
you, but the outcome was exactly the same. Although I AM thankful to
everyone who found some time to answer, i'd welcome if you focused less
on what i might've done wrong (with grub or anything else), but advise
me how to get the initial ramdisk to work.

I'm really upset with this all, coz I dunno what other distro to try.
SUSE is too bloated, Debian is out-of-date, Ubuntu doesn't provide a
"current" version (the stable release only gets critical security
updates), and I'm afraid to try Gentoo. I suppose i might give Fedora
one last chance.

Mahy

> I'm really upset with this all, coz I dunno what other distro to try.
> SUSE is too bloated, Debian is out-of-date, Ubuntu doesn't provide a
> "current" version (the stable release only gets critical security
> updates), and I'm afraid to try Gentoo. I suppose i might give Fedora
> one last chance.
>
> Mahy

You know, if you are going to "chicken out" and run away with your tail
between your legs because you cant figure out a problem, you should
honestly consider going with a distro that will do everything FOR you.
Windows XP comes to mind.