Uz.ytkownik Ingo Molnar napisa?:
> On Wed, 7 Aug 2002 [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>>LILO without "linear" or "lba32" is inherently broken: it will talk CHS
>>at boot time to the BIOS and hence needs a geometry and install time,
>>and nobody knows the geometry required. So, if LILO doesnt break, this
>>is pure coincidence.
>
>
> well, lilo without linear worked for like years on this box ...
You have to take in to account that by creating a new kernel image
you are storing it sometimes after a long long time at perhaps maybe
another block group far away. This is becouse ext2 suddenly may feel
like doing so...And surprisingly you have to teach lilo about the new
far away sectors becouse basic C/H/S addressing can't reach them
anylonger. Been there seen that frequently enough.
It would be maybe informative if you could actually provide the
first sector address used by the inode corresponding to vmlinuz.
At least this way one could resolve the issue definitively.
>>And you talk about corruption, and I am surprised again. Have you
>>verified that there really was a difference? Or do you only suspect
>>corruption because LILO has problem? (In that case I can assure you that
>>there was no corruption.)
>
>
> you are right, there was no corruption most likely. And the IDE subsystem
> is most definitely innocent.
I have told you :-).
BTW.> Please don't consider RH lilo "fairly standard" it *is* messing
with the geometry issues, since in esp. limbo.
On Thu, 8 Aug 2002, Marcin Dalecki wrote:
> >>LILO without "linear" or "lba32" is inherently broken: it will talk CHS
> >>at boot time to the BIOS and hence needs a geometry and install time,
> >>and nobody knows the geometry required. So, if LILO doesnt break, this
> >>is pure coincidence.
> >
> >
> > well, lilo without linear worked for like years on this box ...
>
> You have to take in to account that by creating a new kernel image
> you are storing it sometimes after a long long time at perhaps maybe
> another block group far away. This is becouse ext2 suddenly may feel
> like doing so...And surprisingly you have to teach lilo about the new
> far away sectors becouse basic C/H/S addressing can't reach them
> anylonger. Been there seen that frequently enough.
this particular testbox has seen *thousands* of development kernels of all
sizes, and i often have filled up the complete /boot partition. It is very
unlikely that this harmless (and not too big) 2.5.29 kernel would have
been the first one to trigger a 'wrong' CHS combination. Especially since
2.4 kernels with exactly the *same* bzImage (and same lilo) work just
fine.
Ingo