Re: bad error
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 09:24:14PM -0800, J Q Private wrote:
> I solved it in that thread, never previously realizing
> that the shell (I have some LSL install CD-ROM of
> 2.2.16) I needed was after you start the installation
> procedure.
>
> It's still odd to me, though. Please correct me if
> I'm wrong.
I think it's odd, too. My first reaction, after writing resc1440.bin
to a floppy and booting it, was "Huh? This isn't a rescue disk, it's
the install disk". I'd probably found the shell option when I
originally installed, but that was a long time ago, so I'd forgotten
it was there. I was motivated to carry on by the fact that the system
was totally wasted and I was half-resigned to having to reinstall it
anyway. Fortunately I explored the menu a bit, found the shell, and
made another demonstration of the superiority of Linux over Windoze.
> I still have the two good kernels I compiled on the
> machine, but until I ran e2fsck all over, they
> wouldn't boot, either.
>
> I suppose attempting to boot the bad kernel (which
> didn't have support compiled in to read hard drives,
> donut!) actually hosed the hard drive, and thus
> prevented even the good kernels from working.
I've had Windoze do stuff like that, but I'd be very surprised if a
production Linux kernel would.
My machine rescuing experience told me that I couldn't boot a 2.4
kernel with the init for a 2.2 kernel. Indeed, when I upgraded my
kernel from 2.2 to 2.4, init was one of the other things I had to
upgrade. I think it only went from 2.75 to 2.76, but the important
point, I think, is that the new version was compiled against the new
kernel.
> They're There!
> They're Poor!
> They Don't Want Any War!
Like that!
Pigeon
Reply to: