Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] udev and devfs

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Craig Dyke" <grail AT westnet.com.au>
  • To: "discuss" <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] udev and devfs
  • Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 22:29:29 +0800

Arwed

i have two kernels on box at the moment and the only difference between the
two is that one has devfs removed.

One works the other don't :((

Craig
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arwed von Merkatz" <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
To: "discuss" <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 4:37 AM
Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] udev and devfs


> On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 11:19:34PM +0800, Craig Dyke wrote:
> > Arwed
> >
> > Error I get is:
> >
> > init: error opening fifo
> > rc: Booting to runlevel default...
> > INIT_ROOT environment variable not set, using current directory!
> > Error opening //dev/initctl: No such file or directory
> >
> > It stops hear nad the only action I seem to be able to take is to press
> > ctrl-alt-delete
> > and then reboot process kicks off.
> >
> > Craig
>
> I don't really see how that could be caused by devfs not being in the
> kernel, but i'll try it here.
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Arwed von Merkatz" <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
> > To: "discuss" <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 3:34 AM
> > Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] udev and devfs
> >
> >
> > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 10:47:27PM +0800, Craig Dyke wrote:
> > > > Hopefully just a quickie.
> > > >
> > > > I have adopted the udev format and am quite impressed so far :)
> > > >
> > > > My query is, does udev still rely on devfs being built into kernel?
> > > >
> > > > Scenario is that I got udev up and running using suggested steps
from
> > > > earlier emails.
> > > > Once all was working well, I configured a second kernel where I
removed
> > > > devfs and this
> > > > does not load.
> > > >
> > > > Is this correct behaviour?
> > >
> > > udev definitely doesn't need devfs in the kernel. What fails when
> > > loading the new kernel, does it fail to mount the root device? If
that's
> > > the case then you'll want to check if your lilo.conf/grub.conf uses
> > > devfs names for the root= kernel parameter. A devfs kernel can handle
> > > both styles of device names for that parameter, a kernel without devfs
> > > needs a classic device name (e.g. /dev/hda2).
> > >
> > > --
> > > Arwed v. Merkatz Source Mage GNU/Linux
> > developer
> > >
> > http://www.sourcemage.org
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > SM-Discuss mailing list
> > > SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > SM-Discuss mailing list
> > SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
> >
>
> --
> Arwed v. Merkatz Source Mage GNU/Linux
developer
>
http://www.sourcemage.org
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page