Re: 2.0.32, XNvidia, Vtk
manoj:
> >>"Arto" == Arto Astala <astala@tnso13.tele.nokia.fi> writes:
[...]
>
> Oooooh.
I know, I was daring, I wanted to try it out and,
essentially, nothing very bad happened, since I was
able to recover with reasonable amount of work.
> Arto> [...]
>
> The reason that the script asks about using superformat stems
> from the days when superformat was newly introduced; and it had
> problems. If that has indeed changed, I shall make the script not
> ask.
Since somewhere recently devices were changed fdformat
no longer works for me.
>
> Actually, embarrasingly enough, niether seems to work for me:
> [...]
> I think I may well remove this option of formatting the
> floppy. It has aways given me problems.
Probably just ask user to ensure that there is formatted
(but not necessarily empty) floppy, switch to another vc
if needed to do it.
>
> Arto> [...]
> [...]
> And it does ask you if you want to run lilo.
My mistake. I was writing this from memory, 2 days after the fact.
>
> The process does stop, and inform you about failure to write a
> boot floppy. You have to hit return to proceed. It warns about not
> being able to reboot the system.
>
> At this point, unless lilo is run, the system is
> unbootable. Not running lilo is wrong, IMHO.
If *no files (other than lilo.conf)* that lilo knows about
are changed in any way *then* lilo boots as before. That is,
if map file and all files recorded in it are present in the
same physical locations as before.
>
> Arto> [...]
>
> What was the error? was the new lilo.conf incorrect? in what
> way?
line
boot=/dev/hda5
since hda5 is logical partition and not easily bootable
Running lilo with this config might have updated map
file, thus rendering old boot inoperable. On the other
hand it was that already, since location of second stage
loader had changed with lilo version upgrade.
Lilo 20 seems to have a QuickInstall (or QuickSomething
other), it might be useful to use that, when available.
> Arto> ( Aside from possible lilo version problem [...]
I now think that all other problems might be explainable
by lilo version upgrade and not having run lilo at right
moments during it, especially at end. It seems that
lilo now has some means to verify that lilo.conf
generates a bootable config, I have to examine it further.
> Arto> [...]
> [...] [about creating a new vs. appending old conf]
> If one has a valid
> lilo.conf, the dafault is to use it.
Not that difficult to append, usually. But, yes, there
are cases where it will not work. I usually do not use
symbolic links in my lilo.conf, since changing things
outside the conf may change the meaning of the conf.
E.g. installing another kernel makes /vmlinuz point
to another place. A matter of taste only, but if I
install another kernel and rerun old lilo.conf where
no links are used I get the same boot configuration
as before.
>
> Arto> If lilo 20 is installed then no symlinks should be used or
> Arto> changed.
>
> Why?
Can't remember now, thought I had a reason. Should have
spelled it out. I'll try to think one whe I'm home.
> Arto> Maybe that should be the case anyway, since the real
> Arto> lilo.config may reside in some other place in multi boot
> Arto> machines?
>
> On my multiboot machine, it does not. If people are changing
> the Debian conventions, I think they should be capable of dealing
> with the consequences.
If I have several root partitions, for different linux
installations, I usually have only one full lilo.conf,
but I might update kernels in other installations also,
sometimes. On such partitions I might never had done
the work to make a working lilo.conf for booting that
partition alone. I have 4 ide disks + ide cdrom & a
couple of dosses. Haven't yet added NT, tho' (but will,
in time).
> Arto> [...]
> [...]
> Arto> If no links have been broken then not running lilo does not
> Arto> break anything, only new kernel is not yet used.
>
> Links are not broken, they are updated.
Yeah, my mistake, sloppy with the words. Links are valid,
just not what was originally intended. This is probably
a question a certain view of multibooting anything else.
A matter of taste, no real harm either way.
> Arto> The generated lilo.config file was broken, since my partition,
> Arto> /dev/hda5, was a logical one, and lilo gave error for that. Is
> Arto> there a way of detecting the partition type? )
>
> I do not know. Anybody?
/usr/doc/lilo/examples/QuickInstall.gz for lilo 20 seems
to test some partition related things with dd. I also seem
to remember now that all hdaX with X>4 are logical.
> Arto> [...]
> [...][about: do not upgrade kernel and lilo at the same time]
> Arto> Is it necessary or even possible to coordinate upgrades of
> Arto> kernel and bootloader so that their upgrades are not
> Arto> interleaved?
>
> This should be a question for the Deity list.
Are you on it? I'm not, nor will be.
> Arto> [...]
> [...]
> (I think the solution is not to blow away a
> hand crafted lilo.conf).
If you just make lilo.conf.add-on or something like that
and ask user update lilo.conf with that info. Running
lilo at this stage is not necessary *if* the old kernel is
still there, but how do you know that.
In some (of my) multiboot configurations the right solution is
to update lilo.conf of some other installation and run lilo
there, not here. This is prolly rather specialized, tho'.
> [...]
t.aa
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: