Re: What happened to debian - does "stable" keep having any meaning?
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> Now, moving between 6.0.0 and 6.0.1 shouldn't have been a problem, but I
> suspect you actually would have had issues rebooting your 6.0.0 system even
> without the 6.0.1 updates, since you didn't have your fstab in order.
Grub can't be wrong, cause it is working in your system.
So, the only conclusion is: my fstab must be wrong.
I think, that's the same wrong reduction of facts, than my saying: grub is
So let me state, debian 6.0 was working fine til the last update.
On a complex system (yes, for me, linux is quite a complex system) the truth
may be somewhat different. May be, we both are wrong.
So I did some researches with my system constellation (all 8 drives active):
1.) A fresh installation from debian 6.0 netinst CD results in an unbootable
system, even using a single partition installation target.
2.) following the advices of:
results in an unbootable system
3.) at first sight it looks like ubuntu 10.10 is using the same grub variant,
but a closer look shows, that on ubuntu there's no /boot/device.map
4.) booting the debian 6.0 netinst CD in rescue64 mode and chrooting the
ubuntu installation, a "grub-install /dev/sde" brings my system back into play
Don't take me wrong! I'm no friend of ubuntu and changing to ubuntu is no
acceptable solution for me.
But - if having an unused ubuntu installation is the only solution to get a
bootable system - of cause, I will use it.
Well, I stil believe, that some of the last update was not good enuf for
debian stable ...