[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: 2.6-test10 and DAC960 device trouble



Ok, I made some progress, but not much...
I was able to initially mount the root filesystem by passing the root
device number to the kernel instead of the name (ie, root=3002).
Booting then proceeds until it tries to remount root, and then I get a
Bad Superblock error on the root filesystem.  Devfs does not create the
proper devices: all i get is /dev/rd/host0/disc0.
Thus is not at all consistant with the 2.4 naming system, and the second
channel of my dac960 isn't even there at all.
In addition, whenever i try to mount anything (also noticed it when i
tried a cp command) i get some modprobe errors (can't find
/lib/modules-2.6.0-test10...") which is reallly strange since i don't
have loadable module support enabled in the kernel.
Mike

On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 10:27:47AM -0800, MC wrote:
> Hello -
> I decided to give 2.6.0-test10 a go on my AS1200.
> The compile went fine (gcc-3.2) - very few warnings - but the kernel
> cannot mount the root filesystem which resides on the dac960 -
> /dev/rd/c0d0p2.  I have tried with and without devfs, and i have tried
> both /dev/rd/c0d0p2 and /dev/rd/disc0/part2 as root device name.  I have
> it running fine in 2.4.22 with patched do_mounts.c, but 2.6 is alot
> different.  Anybody been able to solve this?
> Thank's,
> Mike
> 
> -- 
>   To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
>   	-- Theodore Roosevelt
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

-- 
  To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
  	-- Theodore Roosevelt



Reply to: