Gentoo Archives: gentoo-desktop

From: Lindsay Haisley <fmouse-gentoo@×××.com>
To: gentoo-desktop@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-desktop] System problems
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 01:58:48
Message-Id: 1300672634.8325.179.camel@vishnu.fmp.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-desktop] System problems by Roman Zilka
1 On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 00:10 +0100, Roman Zilka wrote:
2 > > /etc/fstab has been edited several times, as I noted in my post. The
3 > > kernel, udev and /etc/fstab have been now been reverted, as I also noted, so
4 > > I could get the desktop working. Considering that, posting any of the
5 > > information you've asked for would probably be useless.
6 >
7 > OK, so be it, fstab is not that important.
8
9 Actually, /etc/fstab has been central to the problem, since the system
10 seems to be unable to interpret it during the boot process, although the
11 kernel correctly interprets the same drive spec when it's on the kernel
12 cmd line in menu.lst.
13
14 > > Roman, if you don't have any useful insights based on the information I
15 > > already posted, then please don't post on thread and leave it to others
16 > > who may.
17 >
18 > I may have useful insights that are different from the insights posted
19 > previously by other people. But I need your `emerge --info` and kernel
20 > conf for that first. To give you a hint of explanation: I need the
21 > kernel conf to look for whatever may be wrong in there.
22
23 What I'll do is this, Roman. I've emerged the linux-2.6.36-gentoo-r5
24 kernel and built it with the _stock_ Gentoo settings. I'll add the
25 specific drivers for my hardware, such as my NIC and dual sound cards,
26 rebuild the kernel again and take another shot at it when my time
27 allows. If the problem persists, _then_ my kernel .config may be a
28 candidate for more eyes to look at than mine.
29
30 As you kind of point out, it really doesn't make sense to work with
31 trying to whip into shape a kernel that's no longer even in the portage
32 tree, and probably shouldn't be used in any event, and which has been
33 configured with my legacy .config setup.
34
35 This will take some of the variables out of the problem and if
36 necessary, perhaps we can look at the situation more cleanly.
37
38 > There's no
39 > point in sending you a working conf for my (i.e., different) machine -
40 > there's plenty of those lying around the net, as we both know. I assume
41 > you have either already tried one of those or simply don't want to use
42 > one for some reason.
43
44 I'm going to start with the _stock_ Gentoo kernel config, which should
45 at very least bring up the drives. If I can get the drives and boot
46 process to work, then I can add modules and facilities after that.
47
48 > Thus, it's possible that you keep making a
49 > recurring mistake while modifying default / borrowed / your own old
50 > configs.
51
52 This is absolutely true, as noted above.
53
54 > And I need to see your conf to discover such potential
55 > mistakes. As for `emerge --info`, it may uncover problems relevant in
56 > this case too.
57
58 "emerge --info" is the the stock Gentoo system profile, and I'll be
59 happy to share it, but in this case I'm looking at what's almost a
60 "pre-Gentoo" issue, involving the kernel and the boot-up.
61
62 > Please, cooperate with those whom you'd asked for help. Writing these
63 > several paragraphs worth of e-mail text as a reply was a waste of time
64 > for you - it clearly hasn't produced any help at all regarding your
65 > booting issue.
66
67 Taking the desktop system off-line, re-emerging udev, bringing it up
68 into its failure mode with a newer kernel and pulling the necessary
69 pieces together, then backing out and putting everything back so the
70 system is actually fairly usable is a major hassle. I have had _zero_
71 time to work on this problem since I posted this morning, but will be
72 able to take another run at it this evening, hopefully. Writing is no
73 effort for me, and doesn't disable my desktop ;)
74
75 > On the other hand, sending me what I'd asked for right
76 > away would not only eat up much less of your time, it might have
77 > yielded a solution by now. I suppose you're asking for help because you
78 > understand that others may be more knowledgeable than yourself.
79
80 We are all have different skill and knowledge sets, and sometimes, as
81 everyone has found out, the very process of organizing the presentation
82 of a problem to others leads one to a solution.
83
84 > > Can you cite a source or sources for this assertion?
85 >
86 > The source is the very reality of change of things in the world over
87 > time. Software evolves and because hardly anything in nature has
88 > infinite duration,
89
90 I was hoping for something a little less nebulous ;-)
91
92 > And some of those are relatively serious security holes and it'd take a
93 > really special handling of the system to avoid them. And I'm talking
94 > about handling that'd probably render an Internet-connected desktop box
95 > with a web browser unusable.
96
97 This desktop box is on an RFC-1918 masqueraded network. It has zero
98 exposure to the Internet, except insofar as the firewall will permit
99 traffic from related and established connections, as per the firewall
100 NAT rules. The only other person on the LAN is my sweetie, and as far
101 as I know I can trust her not to black-hat hack my desktop system :-)
102 All my professional work is done via VPNs to my client's systems.
103
104 > And yes, Gentoo devs deem 2.6.29 dangerous too - that's why it isn't in
105 > the current Portage tree at all (vanilla-sources and gentoo-sources).
106 > Kernel devs themselves deem it dangerous and they don't maintain that
107 > branch anymore.
108
109 Thanks, Roman. This is very useful lore. As I noted, I've moved on to
110 2.6.36-gentoo-r5.
111
112 > > In almost every case, I've found that people who lecture me online about
113 > > my system admin practices don't really have a handle on the issue about
114 > > which I'm writing. Please prove me wrong :-)
115 >
116 > I suppose one can say I've done just that, having written what I've
117 > written. At least I hope did so in a sensitive way. There's no need to
118 > defend your admin skills in case you happen to feel offended by
119 > something above. Why is there no need? Because failing in an honest
120 > effort is not a reason for disregard for a human being. So there's
121 > actually no harm for you from that.
122
123 No problem, sir. I've already moved on.
124
125 Tonight or tomorrow evening I'll add the necessary minimal mods to the
126 stock build of the Gentoo kernel noted above, and take another shot at
127 this problem. _If_ I continue to have this problem then I'll post my
128 results to this list in a somewhat more ordered fashion. Rather than
129 posting my entire kernel .config, emerge --info and /etc/fstab to this
130 list, which I consider questionable netiquette, I'll put it on my
131 personal file space on one of my servers and post the URL. We can take
132 it from there.
133
134 Thanks for your help. Unless you have specific suggestions for me to
135 try out, you might want to stand by until I've had a chance to take a
136 shot at the problem with the newer kernel.
137
138 lh
139
140 --
141 Lindsay Haisley | SUPPORT NETWORK NEUTRALITY
142 FMP Computer Services | --------------------------
143 512-259-1190 | Boycott Yahoo, RoadRunner, AOL
144 http://www.fmp.com | and Verison

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-desktop] System problems Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-desktop] System problems Roman Zilka <zilka@×××××××.cz>