A. Guy Called Tyketto writes:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 11:38:54AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > Maybe you forwarded a wrong message? I don't understand how a failure of
> > the kernel to mount the root filesystem is related to devfs. The
> > workaround is probably related, but shouldn't we care about the proper
> > fix?
> >
> > By the way, is the root device specified correctly in the bootblock (using
> > rdev)? Can you omit the "root" parameter? What happens with other
> > bootloaders (lilo, syslinux, loadlin)? What do you see in /proc/cmdline?
>
> I had the same problem as the person who had originally posted this
> to
> the LKML. I have /dev/hda1 set up to be the root partition, and with booting
> 2.5.19 and higher (2.5.20{dj1,2,3}) I got that /dev/hda1 was not a valid
> partition, and dropped me into single user mode to fix the problem, then
> reboot.
>
> with kernels < 2.5.19, devfs maps /dev/hda1 to
> /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part1. with kernels 2.5.19 and higher, that
> mapping changes to /dev/ata/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part1. The difference is
> 'ide' and 'ata'.
>
> > > This feature was introduced in 2.5.19
> >
> > Feature? Shouldn't we call it a bug? Maybe I don't understand what you
> > mean.
>
> It culd be a feature; wanting to change or accent the fact
> that it's on an ATA bus, or that it's an ATA/IDE drive. We don't
> know which it is.
It's a stupidity. /dev/ide is the published interface and shouldn't be
changed. Someone want to code up a patch to correct this?
Regards,
Richard....
Permanent: rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Current: rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|