Bug#494422: [initramfs-tools] upgrading from 0.89 to 0.92e gets a kernel panic on next reboot
Hello,
thank you very much for your insights Martin. I was able to solve the problem.
I updated lilo to 1:22.8-6 and rebooted... another kernel panic.
Then added the line "large-memory" in /etc/lilo.conf and this time I
was able to reboot the system using the new kernel :D
Then I installed grub on the first partition of my drive (some people
will want it on the MBR isntead)
grub-install /dev/sda1
And after another reboot I removed lilo.
The bug is with lilo, which should add the "large-memory" line in
lilo.conf. At the very least issue a warning.
I would suggest initramfs-tools to ask the user which bootloader he is
using when both lilo and grub are detected. Or at least issue a
warning like "lilo was executed, but you may want grub instead, in
that case run it yourself by ..."
This bug should be changed to minor or wishlist.
Thanks and regards.
PS: after all of this I'm unsure if I should update my grub package :-/ heh
On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com> wrote:
> * Monkey D. Luffy <the.real.monkey.d.luffy@gmail.com> [2008-08-09 12:05]:
>> I reboot the system and surprise: grub was *overwritten* by lilo!!!
>> I try to boot anyway... and another surprise:
>> ================
>> ramdisk: couldn't find valid ram disk image starting at 0
>> list of all partitions:
>> no filesystem could mount root, tried:
>> kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: unable to mount root fs in unknown-block (8,1)
>
> This is a known bug in lilo, see #479607 Although I see it was
> fixed in version 1:22.8-6. Which version of lilo do you have
> installed?
>
I had 1:22.8-3, in which #479607 was open (by looking at debian
changelog), since it was only fixed in 1:22.8-5.
I have now upgraded to 1:22.8-6 but it didn't fix me the problem. I
get the same kernel panic error.
>> I reboot the system and surprise: grub was *overwritten* by lilo!!!
>
> Maybe this is what happens when you have both grub and lilo installed.
> But I don't know.
>
It could be it. It was stupid of me to have both boot loaders... maybe
some dependency or suggestions made me install it... I don't know. But
ideally it should detect which bootloader is being used and use it.
Reply to: