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

RE: /boot

>On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 12:00:25PM -0500, Harry Cochran wrote:
>> Am I right that with /dev/sda1 mounted as /boot, if I am at say /var a
>> cd /boot should go to the /dev/sda1 partition? If so, that /boot is empty
>> shown above.
>> Now for the bad news ... cd / and then cd boot which should bring me to
>> boot directory under the root is also empty.

On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 12:37:25PM -0500, Grant Grundler wrote:

>No - "mount /dev/sda1 /boot" will overlay and hide the original contents
>on /dev/sda3.

So you are saying that unless you can umount /boot, you can't get to /boot
on sda3, right? The problem that started this thread is that I can't umount
/boot. I just get "device is busy". I have cd'd to /var which is on sdb1,
but I still can't umount /boot.

>That's why we keep telling you to "mount /dev/sda1 /mnt" and then copy
>the /boot contents to /mnt.

>> Arrrg. Will an apt-get install
>> kernel-image-2.6.8-2-32-smp reload /dev/sda1 with the files I need to

>Probably not. But "dpkg -i kernel-image-2.6.8-2-32-smp.deb" will.
>(just get the name of the .deb file right)

Actually apt-get remove kernel-image-2.6.8-2-32-smp and then apt-get install
kernel-image-2.6.8-2-32-smp did work with a lot of complaining :-) (I did it
before I got your email).

>> Assuming I can get a loadable kernel and initrd.img back on the /boot on
>> /dev/sda1/, I guess I don't need --update-partitioned /dev/sda in
>> Can you please confirm that?

>You do need --update-partitioned /dev/sda in palo.conf.

Thanks ... glad I got at least one thing right :-).

>> Also I did cd /var and then tried umount /boot and got "device is busy"
>> still. What am I doing wrong?

>It sounds like /boot is the original directory on /dev/sda3.
>No one uses /boot for anything *except* palo to load vmlinux/initrd.

Bottom line is I can't umount /boot or umount /dev/sda1 ... I always get
"device is busy". I know I'm missing something here, but I don't know what
it is.



Reply to: