Vendor 'Gen-ATA' error code: 0x3
Demon
2. It gets past the configuration of the drive partition and then reboots.
However, as it tries to boot it says-
Warning: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@7,1/ide@0 (ata0)
timeout : abort request, target=0 lun=0
(this repeats 3 more times, then...)
Warning: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@7,1/cmdk@0,0 (Disk 0)
Error for command 'read sector'. Error level 'Informational'
Sense Key: aborted command
Vendor 'Gen-ATA' error code: 0x3
Any ideas?
Demon
news:b0jtb5$fk3$1$8302...@news.demon.co.uk...
More info -
When I boot from disk it automatically runs the config assistant. If I F2
all the way, accepting the defaults and choose the DISK as the boot device,
it starts to boot but gives the above error (it doesn't get past the above
error - it repeats several times then reboots).
However, if boot from CD1, go into the config assistant, F2 all the way,
accepting the defaults and choose the DISK as the boot device (IE - I DO
EXACTLY THE SAME AS ABOVE BUT FROM THE CD), it boots all the way into the
CDE. Now it works as you would expect - I can log in and out have command
prompts and run applications.
Now what's that all about? Why does it need the CD? Both disk and CD both
boot into the config assistant, but one works and the other doesn't...???
How do I get it to boot from disk?
Dave Uhring
Did you set up DMA on your hard drive?
Check /boot/solaris/bootenv.rc and see if you have this line:
setprop ata-dma-enabled '1'
After the system reports the Gen-ATA error, try hitting the reset button
and booting again.
Demon
news:pan.2003.01.21....@yahoo.com...
> Did you set up DMA on your hard drive?
Ultra DMA is set to "5" in the BIOS, I can't disable or change this value.
> Check /boot/solaris/bootenv.rc and see if you have this line:
> setprop ata-dma-enabled '1'
I checked, it is there.
> After the system reports the Gen-ATA error, try hitting the reset button
> and booting again.
Huh. That worked. So I can now boot without the CD - but I have to boot into
the config assistant twice to do it...
I'm hoping that suggestion was to test a theory, and now your going to give
the the explanation, and tell me how to fix it...?
8)
Dave Uhring
> Huh. That worked. So I can now boot without the CD - but I have to boot into
> the config assistant twice to do it...
>
No, when the DCA gets to the point where you select a drive look at the
bottom of the screen for IIRC F4-Boot Tasks. Select that and then select
your default boot drive.
> I'm hoping that suggestion was to test a theory, and now your going to give
> the the explanation, and tell me how to fix it...?
There is a partial fix for Solaris 8 on x86 but I think that what you need
to do on any reboot is simply to make sure the reboot is a "cold" boot,
i.e. hit the reset switch to force the memory test in POST.
Demon
> No, when the DCA gets to the point where you select a drive look at the
> bottom of the screen for IIRC F4-Boot Tasks. Select that and then select
> your default boot drive.
Did that before but it didn't work
> There is a partial fix for Solaris 8 on x86 but I think that what you need
> to do on any reboot is simply to make sure the reboot is a "cold" boot,
> i.e. hit the reset switch to force the memory test in POST.
But it works now, guess I didn't do a hard reset. Thanks!
Now to see if I can get it to dual boot with Linux... then tri-boot with w2k
server...
Dave Uhring
> Now to see if I can get it to dual boot with Linux... then tri-boot with w2k
> server...
Easily done using lilo. Make sure that your Solaris partition is marked
'active'.
Bruce Adler
"Demon" <nob...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b0k4i7$kj3$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk...> ...
> > After the system reports the Gen-ATA error, try hitting the reset button
> > and booting again.
>
> Huh. That worked. So I can now boot without the CD - but I have to boot into
> the config assistant twice to do it...
>
> I'm hoping that suggestion was to test a theory, and now your going to give
> the the explanation, and tell me how to fix it...?
If your system has an AWARD BIOS and you're using an IBM disk drive
then this might be the problem:
In Solaris 9 x86, there's supposed to be a fix that allows one to
configure the ata driver to workaround the AWARD/IBM problem.
Read the ata(7) man page. I haven't yet installed S9x86
so I can't vouch for the fix. YMMV.
Demon
Hmmm. worked fine with grub, except when I choose solaris instead of
booting straight in, it pops up with a new screen, which basically looks
like it's own boot loader - it kind of says 'hey, now there are 4 paritions
which one do you want to boot' (the solaris one is active). As it will
always be the same one how do I get rid of this screen?
Dave Uhring
> Hmmm. worked fine with grub, except when I choose solaris instead of
> booting straight in, it pops up with a new screen, which basically looks
> like it's own boot loader - it kind of says 'hey, now there are 4 paritions
> which one do you want to boot' (the solaris one is active). As it will
> always be the same one how do I get rid of this screen?
You're stuck with that one. Just select your Solaris partition and
continue. About the only time you really have to reboot Solaris is after
installing a kernel patch so that is a rather trivial aggravation.
Actually, if your other OSs are on primary partitions you can use that
boot selector rather than GRUB or lilo. I didn't mention that before
because on the one multiple-boot system which I have Linux resides
entirely within the 'extended' partition and the Solaris boot selector
cannot see it. I just supposed that your OS layout was similar.
Joerg Schilling
Easily done with the Solaris boot loader. Make sure not to install Lilo in the
primary bioot block but only into the boot block of the Linux partition.
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1
schi...@fokus.fhg.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling
URL: http://www.fokus.fhg.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Philip Brown
>...
>Hmmm. worked fine with grub, except when I choose solaris instead of
>booting straight in, it pops up with a new screen, which basically looks
>like it's own boot loader - it kind of says 'hey, now there are 4 paritions
>which one do you want to boot' (the solaris one is active). As it will
>always be the same one how do I get rid of this screen?
I would think you could modify the grub source, so that it understands
solaris's ufs filesystem, and then could load the secondary boot loader
directly, rather than going through solaris's partition bootstrap code.
(Hey, grub is Open Source! that means "anyone" can update the source,
right? Cool, have fun! :-)
[or perhaps it is neccessary to load the the solaris kernel directly,
skipping the bootloader stuff altogether. I dunno]
--
http://www.blastwave.org/ for solaris pre-packaged binaries with pkg-get
Sign up to maintain a package for your own favourite software!
[Trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
S.1618 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:SN01618:@@@D
http://www.spamlaws.com/state/ca1.html
Dave Uhring
> In article <pan.2003.01.21....@yahoo.com>,
> Dave Uhring <daveu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 19:27:13 +0000, Demon wrote:
>>
>>> Now to see if I can get it to dual boot with Linux... then tri-boot with w2k
>>> server...
>>
>>Easily done using lilo. Make sure that your Solaris partition is marked
>>'active'.
>
> Easily done with the Solaris boot loader. Make sure not to install Lilo in the
> primary bioot block but only into the boot block of the Linux partition.
The Solaris boot loader will not boot Linux installed on extended
partitions, however, as is the case with my desktop system. Nor will it
boot an OS installed on the IDE primary slave drive.
Joerg Schilling
Dave Uhring <daveu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Now to see if I can get it to dual boot with Linux... then tri-boot with w2k
>>>> server...
>>>
>>>Easily done using lilo. Make sure that your Solaris partition is marked
>>>'active'.
>>
>> Easily done with the Solaris boot loader. Make sure not to install Lilo in the
>> primary bioot block but only into the boot block of the Linux partition.
>
>The Solaris boot loader will not boot Linux installed on extended
>partitions, however, as is the case with my desktop system. Nor will it
>boot an OS installed on the IDE primary slave drive.
I don't know what this should mean.....
However, the Solaris boot loader will perfectly work with Linux if yoy do what
I described: Install a Linux boot in the Linux partition _only_ and use the
Solaris bootloader in the primary boot block. Try it out! This is how I use it
since 4 years....
Dave Uhring
> However, the Solaris boot loader will perfectly work with Linux if yoy do what
> I described: Install a Linux boot in the Linux partition _only_ and use the
> Solaris bootloader in the primary boot block. Try it out! This is how I use it
> since 4 years....
If Linux /boot is on a primary partition that will work. If /boot is on
an extended - logical - partition it will not work. The Solaris boot
loader does not have the capability of booting from such partitions.
I most recently observed this about 3 months ago after IBM sent me a
replacement hard drive and I installed Windows, FreeBSD, Linux and
Solaris on that drive. It's a 45GB drive and has more than enough space
available for all 4 of those OS for desktop use.
NetBSD is also installed on the 2d drive and the Solaris boot loader
cannot see it either.
Joerg Schilling
>
>
>> However, the Solaris boot loader will perfectly work with Linux if yoy do what
>> I described: Install a Linux boot in the Linux partition _only_ and use the
>> Solaris bootloader in the primary boot block. Try it out! This is how I use it
>> since 4 years....
>
>If Linux /boot is on a primary partition that will work. If /boot is on
>an extended - logical - partition it will not work. The Solaris boot
>loader does not have the capability of booting from such partitions.
Looks like you never tried it or you did not read my paosting correctly :-(
If you install it the way I did describe, then the Solaris boot loader
will never try to understand anything from Linux. It will just start Lilo in the
boot block of the primary partition that hoilds the secondary partitions.
As this is a "mouse click" option in the SuSE install environment, it should
be easy to set up. Did you install a Linux distribution that has an
install program that is worse?
...
>NetBSD is also installed on the 2d drive and the Solaris boot loader
>cannot see it either.
You need to install a second boot loader inside the primary partition that
holds the sub-partitions. This boot loader must know how to boot further on.
Dave Uhring
>
> Looks like you never tried it or you did not read my paosting correctly :-(
>
> If you install it the way I did describe, then the Solaris boot loader
> will never try to understand anything from Linux. It will just start Lilo in the
> boot block of the primary partition that hoilds the secondary partitions.
> As this is a "mouse click" option in the SuSE install environment, it should
> be easy to set up. Did you install a Linux distribution that has an
> install program that is worse?
>
Where on your drive is Linux installed? What are its /boot and /
partitions?
> ...
>>NetBSD is also installed on the 2d drive and the Solaris boot loader
>>cannot see it either.
>
> You need to install a second boot loader inside the primary partition that
> holds the sub-partitions. This boot loader must know how to boot further on.
lilo installed on the MBR means that only one boot loader must be added.
Joerg Schilling
>
>>
>> Looks like you never tried it or you did not read my paosting correctly :-(
>>
>> If you install it the way I did describe, then the Solaris boot loader
>> will never try to understand anything from Linux. It will just start Lilo in the
>> boot block of the primary partition that hoilds the secondary partitions.
>> As this is a "mouse click" option in the SuSE install environment, it should
>> be easy to set up. Did you install a Linux distribution that has an
>> install program that is worse?
>>
>
>Where on your drive is Linux installed? What are its /boot and /
>partitions?
Partition Status Type Start End Length %
========= ====== ============ ===== === ====== ===
1 DOS-BIG 0 254 255 25
2 Active Solaris 255 510 256 25
3 EXT-DOS 511 766 256 25
MBR holds Solaris boot, DOS in on 1, Solaris is on 3 and Linux is on 3.
hdump -a /dev/rdsk/c0d0p3 |p
0: EB 69 4C 49 4C 4F 01 00 14 00 B5 00 00 00 00 00 .iLILO..........
10: D7 F0 65 35 8C C3 80 EF 01 8D C3 80 EF 01 8B C3 ..e5............
20: 80 EF 01 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 8F C3 80 EF 01 ................
30: B4 C3 80 DD 01 B5 C3 80 DD 01 B6 C3 80 DD 01 B7 ................
40: C3 80 DD 01 B8 C3 80 DD 01 B9 C3 80 DD 01 BA C3 ................
50: 80 DD 01 BB C3 80 DD 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
60: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 B8 C0 07 8E D8 ................
70: 8C 06 66 00 89 36 64 00 89 1E 68 00 88 16 6A 00 ..f..6d...h...j.
Demon
> Hmmm. worked fine with grub, except when I choose solaris instead of
> booting straight in, it pops up with a new screen, which basically looks
> like it's own boot loader - it kind of says 'hey, now there are 4
paritions
> which one do you want to boot' (the solaris one is active). As it will
> always be the same one how do I get rid of this screen?
>
ok, now what do we think will happen if I try to install w2k advanced server
on the same server? will the MS boot loader overwrite grub? Will it
recognise the existing settings? It's normally pretty good with other MS
stuff (had dos, 98, w2k pro, and 2 x w2k adv server at the same time
once...) but I've only just started with unix...
or maybe now would be a good time to try that win2003 server I downloaded
last week... 8)
Dave Uhring
> In article <pan.2003.01.22....@yahoo.com>,
> Dave Uhring <daveu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Where on your drive is Linux installed? What are its /boot and /
>>partitions?
>
> Partition Status Type Start End Length %
> ========= ====== ============ ===== === ====== ===
> 1 DOS-BIG 0 254 255 25
> 2 Active Solaris 255 510 256 25
> 3 EXT-DOS 511 766 256 25
>
>
> MBR holds Solaris boot, DOS in on 1, Solaris is on 3 and Linux is on 3.
>
> hdump -a /dev/rdsk/c0d0p3 |p
> 0: EB 69 4C 49 4C 4F 01 00 14 00 B5 00 00 00 00 00 .iLILO..........
Presumably there are, in Linux terms, /dev/hda5, /dev/hda6, etc. defined
in the extended partition table on /dev/hda3. Yes, that would allow the
Solaris boot loader to find and execute lilo. The requirement of adding
additional boot loaders in order to be able to boot from the second drive
or from SCSI drives, however, is anything but elegant, particularly since
lilo can boot any OS located on the primary master and slave drives and
any attached SCSI drives.
Dave Uhring
> ok, now what do we think will happen if I try to install w2k advanced server
> on the same server? will the MS boot loader overwrite grub? Will it
> recognise the existing settings? It's normally pretty good with other MS
> stuff (had dos, 98, w2k pro, and 2 x w2k adv server at the same time
> once...) but I've only just started with unix...
>
Any Windows installation is likely to overwrite the MBR. Be sure you know
how to get back into Linux. Most Linux installation CDs can boot you to a
shell from which either your / directory is already mounted or you can
manually mount it.
> or maybe now would be a good time to try that win2003 server I downloaded
> last week... 8)
Never is a good time for that crap.
Demon
> > or maybe now would be a good time to try that win2003 server I
downloaded
> > last week... 8)
>
> Never is a good time for that crap.
Tried it already, or just based on all the other MS products...? 8)
Dave Uhring
>
> Tried it already, or just based on all the other MS products...? 8)
Their enhanced copy of CP/M worked pretty well within its limits. That
was the last decent piece of software from MSFT.
I have WinXP installed on my Athlon machine; haven't booted into it since
I installed it a few months ago except to run Windows Update. Solaris is
on the server, OpenBSD on the firewall, Solaris on this Sun box and I
normally use either Slackware or FreeBSD on the Athlon box.
Demon
> >
> > Tried it already, or just based on all the other MS products...? 8)
>
> Their enhanced copy of CP/M worked pretty well within its limits. That
> was the last decent piece of software from MSFT.
ah, good old dos. never as good as DR-DOS though.
> I have WinXP installed on my Athlon machine;
Piece of crap.
> haven't booted into it since
Good thing too...
> I installed it a few months ago except to run Windows Update. Solaris is
> on the server, OpenBSD on the firewall, Solaris on this Sun box and I
> normally use either Slackware or FreeBSD on the Athlon box.
I use w2k for the time being. As a double MCSE I have to show some
loyalty - at least until I transition to Linux/Solaris anyway...
What's the corporate market like out there for Linux skills? Is it worth
bothering or should I concentrate on solaris? (maybe asking the solaris
group isn't such a good thing...)
Dave Uhring
> What's the corporate market like out there for Linux skills? Is it worth
> bothering or should I concentrate on solaris? (maybe asking the solaris
> group isn't such a good thing...)
Damn if I know. I'm out of work and not finding much of anything.
Demon
I guess that's the good thing about MS - the products are so crap they need
an army of support people to keep things running... 8)
Demon
> Damn if I know. I'm out of work and not finding much of anything.
UK or US?
Dave Uhring
> I guess that's the good thing about MS - the products are so crap they need
> an army of support people to keep things running... 8)
We call that 'job security'.
Dave Uhring
>
>> Damn if I know. I'm out of work and not finding much of anything.
>
> UK or US?
US, Midwest.
Rich Teer
You too, huh? Judging by some of the questions here, most of the
good Solaris admins have been replaced by wet-behind-the-ears kids
who are no where near enough experienced to look after their company's
servers. But too many bosses are addicted to false economies... :-(
--
Rich Teer
President,
Rite Online Inc.
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-online.net
Dave Uhring
> You too, huh? Judging by some of the questions here, most of the
> good Solaris admins have been replaced by wet-behind-the-ears kids
> who are no where near enough experienced to look after their company's
> servers. But too many bosses are addicted to false economies... :-(
Like Angela :-))
Rich Teer
> What's the corporate market like out there for Linux skills? Is it worth
> bothering or should I concentrate on solaris? (maybe asking the solaris
> group isn't such a good thing...)
Consider the market for Linux: I imagine most corporate
adopters are those that believe the hype, and like the
price. Since they're paying nothing for the software,
and little for the machines (let's face it, most Linux
just use commodity PCs - hardly the best choice in an
enterprise environment), they're unlikely to want to
pay too much for their admins.
Doubtless there will be exceptions to this rule, but
I'd bet that Solaris admins get paid more.