Re: [FYI] lilo can not parse compact
See below for my responses.
At 12:41 PM 1/3/00 +1300, Mark van Walraven wrote:
>Hi Ross,
>
>On Sun, Jan 02, 2000 at 12:47:49PM -0800, Ross Boylan wrote:
>> I can confirm that lilo ran successfully when I changed
>> root=
>> to
>> root=/dev/hda6
>>
>> I had thought that lilo was supposed to default correctly with a blank, but
>> I guess not.
>
>The man page for lilo.conf says:
>
> root=root-device
> This specifies the device that should be mounted as
> root. If the special name current is used, the
> root device is set to the device on which the root
> file system is currently mounted. If the root has
> been changed with -r , the respective device is
> used. If the variable `root' is omitted, the root
> device setting contained in the kernel image is
> used. (And that is set at compile time using the
> ROOT_DEV variable in the kernel Makefile, and can
> later be changed with the rdev(8) program.)
>
>So, it appears that omitting a 'root' specification altogether is ok,
>but a blank value is not.
>
>> So this looks to be more a bug with the setup of lilo.conf at initial
>> system creation (I suppose that
>> it uses liloconfig) than with lilo itself.
>
>The initial lilo.conf is generated by dbootstrap (file bootconfig.c),
>which deliberately writes a blank if the root partition is not on the
>first IDE or SCSI disk, or is on a SCSI disk when hda also exists.
>(In both cases, a problem box, warning the installer to boot the system
>using the rescue disk and configure lilo manually, is displayed.)
Hmm, I'd think dbootstrap would call liloconfig. Seems like a potential
duplication of effort and synchronization problem.
I believe I did get the message saying to use the rescue disk to boot the
system.
FYI this came up because I was playing games to get the NT loader to boot
linux.
>
>Since your root partition is a logical partition, so you should have been
>prompted for the name of an extended partition in which to install lilo.
>Which one did you choose?
/dev/hda6
>
>I think there may be a problem in bootconfig.c.
>
>In any event, I don't think this is a lilo problem.
>
>Regards,
>
>Mark.
You or other suitably empowered person should feel free to reclassify the
bug to boot-floppy, if appropriate.
Reply to: