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

Re: Re: init problems



Maria McKinley wrote:
 
> Thanks for the response. I am putting a gPXE image on a floppy, and
> booting from the floppy. From there it downloads the kernel with initrd,
> runs all of the way through the initrd file, and all of the way through
> /sbin/init as well, actually (but there are errors during init). Initrd
> is able to mount the root file system as read-only, which is what is

Ok, this was useful info. I did the same with a usb stick, but then I found
out that the usb can hold the hole image (linux) and the initrd.

> suppose to happen. The problem is that init is not able to start statd,
> so cannot remount the root file directory according to fstab as a
> read-write mount. I thought at first that statd wasn't starting because
> portmap wasn't starting, but I downgraded portmap to 5-26 from etch, and
> now portmap will start, but statd still doesn't start. When I try to
> start statd from the command line, I get:
> 
> /var/run/rpc.statd.pid failed: Read-only file system.
> 
> Which seems really bizarre, as I need statd in order to mount the root
> file system as read-write. So if anyone knows a way to start statd
> temporarily without a pid until the root file system mounts read-write,
> that would probably solve my problem.

I know this and I've seen it before. I can imagine that your initrd or
bootfiles (rc-files) are broken somewhere.

It could be also the fsck stuff - on nfs I would disable it, or check if it
is running, but I would definitely look into the initrd file and see what's
there.

I don't remember when I had this error or how I solved. I remember it was
something in the initrd, then I wrote a script to create initrd easy and
forgot the utilities.

so may be your mkinitrd program is not configured properly or broken.

you can try 

mount -o remount,rw /

on the emergency shell and see if it works

if so you can put it somehwere in the init script in the initrd or in a
rc-file.

regards


Reply to: