Slakware13 created ext2 not accessible by FC1?

[no.to...@gmail.com]

FC1's `grub` can't see ext2 created by Slakware13.

Instructing <command mode grub> to list all the partitions
which look like runnable; i.e. which contain a `/sbin/init`, by:
> find /sbin/init
shows: (hd0,2) ,4,5,13,15 (hd1,1) ,2,4,34,35,36,37,38

That's very clever, for a boot-loader, without ANY OS running, but !

hda15 [actually hdc15, but with BIOS set to hda, hdb NOT enabled]
i.e. (hd0,14) is not seen. Nor can FC1 mount it.

But FC1's `grub`, [which is krnl 2.4] can boot Debian-Lenny [knl2.6]
at (hd1,35), which can mount and access the Slakware13-created
invisible to FC1 partition.

In summary, it seems that a slakware13 created fs can't be accessed
by a FC1[krnl 2.4].

FC1 =read=> Slak13 == FAIL!
FC1-grub => DebLenny =read=> Slak13 == PASS

Is this to be expected?
Surely the different parameters for <mkfs> don't matter?

== TIA.

[J G Miller]

On Saturday, June 16th, 2012, at 12:05:12h +0000, Chris Glurr burbled:

> That's very clever, for a boot-loader, without ANY OS running

Am I missing something because I understood the whole purpose of
a boot loader was to be functional before any OS was running.

[no.to...@gmail.com]

Yes, and by snipping the context to fraudulently attempt to changed
the context you haven't hidden your ignorance, because the record
remains.

My tongue-in-cheek comment on `grub`which tries to do MUCH
more than be a boot-loader, didn't explain that it tries to:
* <show me all devices>
* <show me all their partitions>
* <show me all their files>
* <show me the CONTENTS of any of these files>

So for instance you could look inside
<hdc3>/home/Peter/telephoneList
for the phone number of Jim-Fish.

A user who was not ignorant/arrogant would admit that this is
remarkable, even without the <I don't know what it's called> syntax.

Syntax-1 is where people pretend they are writing to the little-man
in the box.

Syntax-2 is the menu/spreadsheet style.

Syntax-3 recognises that the FSM has a very small set of valid choices
at any state, so why not just list them, and let the user select.

I don't know how/if the NEW-grub works, but the old one has many
bugs, if you try to exercise it as described above.

IMO it IS worth commenting on.
BTW I noticed that you had nothing to contribute to MY question.

[J G Miller]

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 19:38:01 +0000, no.top.post wrote:

> BTW I noticed that you had nothing to contribute to MY question.

Because I failed to see how your question about Fedora Core and
Slackware is relevent to the Debian newsgroup.

[Dan C]

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 12:05:12 +0000, no.top.post wrote:

> FC1's `grub` can't see ext2 created by Slakware13.

Fuck off, you ignorant fucking stooge.

Who the fuck cares about something as ancient as FC1?

There's no such thing as "Slakware13".


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
"Bother!" said Pooh, as the Facehugger impregnated him.
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Thanks, Obama: http://brandybuck.site40.net/pics/politica/thanks.jpg

[no.to...@gmail.com]

J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:

Fair enough. Let me try and help you then.
If you read the OP S.L.O.W.L.Y you'll see that it refers to:

<grub of FC1 installation> <--- FC1 ?!
was able to boot Debian-lenny <--- Debian ?!
to access Slackware13 <--- Slackware ?1

That was the only way I could access the Slackware13 files.

And yes, there's a lot of benefits to apartheid, but you shouldn't
allow yourself to be intimidated by the wanabe-macho convicts
on alt.os.linux.slackware. They are unlikely to be able to break out
and come and get us.

I believe that since Debian [still ?] uses `grub`, there may be some
grub-knowledgeable readers on alt.os.linux.debian.

And it's fun to hear the predictable a.o.s dogs barking.

WDYS?

[J G Miller]

On Sunday, June 17th, 2012, at 13:51:30h +0000, Chris Glurr explained:

> Let me try and help you then.

Thank you; it is greatly appreciated that you take the
time and trouble to do so. Most people just do not bother.

> If you read the OP S.L.O.W.L.Y you'll see that it refers to:
>
> <grub of FC1 installation> <--- FC1 ?!
> was able to boot Debian-lenny <--- Debian ?!
> to access Slackware13 <--- Slackware ?1

Yes that still conveys the same meaning as the original
no matter how S...L...O...W...L...Y I read it.

The problem is with the grub installation of Fedora Core 1
accessing the latest version of a Slackware installation.

The fact that it was able to access Debian-lenny is irrelevant.

The solution to your problem is very simple though --
update to the latest Fedora Core 17, or a still supported
version of Fedora Core viz FC15 or FC16.

And when you boot into Debian-lenny and mount the Slackware
created file systems, what filesystem type does Debian-lenny
claim that they are? Look at the output of the blkid command --

blkid /dev/sdLN

where L is the appropriate letter a,b,c,d etc and N
is the appropriate number 1,2,3 .. 15

Fedora Core 1 became obsolete very many years ago.
It was released on 2003-11-05 and support ended on 2004-09-20,
which is almost eight years ago.

If you wish to do forensics on an ancient FC1 installation
as to why an ancient version of grub 1 does not findthe file
systems of a recent version of Slackware, then may I humbly
suggest a more appropriate news group would be something like
alt.linux.archaelogy or alt.os.linux.ancient or alt.os.linux.unsupported

I suggest that you will find that you will get very few
responses to your question since most people reading the alt.os.linux
and Debian newsgroups are rather more occupied with trying to resolve
the bugs and problems of current GNU/Linux distributions.

[Chick Tower]

On 2012-06-16, no.to...@gmail.com <no.to...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In summary, it seems that a slakware13 created fs can't be accessed
> by a FC1[krnl 2.4].
>

> Is this to be expected?

Firstly, it's not the kernel that is handling things at boot, it's the
boot loader, in your case, GRUB.

I ran into a similar problem with ext3, Slackware 13.0, and GRUB. It
appears that Slackware changed the default size of it's inodes,
reportedly in preparation for the coming ext4 filesystem, and legacy
GRUB could no longer read the resulting ext3 filesystem. I don't know
if that is true for ext2 or not. I think the latest version of legacy
GRUB can read filesystems with the different inodes, though.

What you could do is copy your in-use menu.lst from Fedora Core 1 to the
Debian /boot/grub directory and install GRUB to the MBR while running
that instance of Debian, since it appears to be able to boot Slackware
13.0. If GRUB isn't installed in Debian, install it first, obviously.
You, yourself, would probably want legacy GRUB, not GRUB2.

Finally, please stop insulting Slackware users while also making yourself
look foolish by referring to Slackware as "slakware". You're saving
only one letter, and you don't strike me as the kind of person to worry
about conserving words, let alone single letters.
--
Chick Tower

For e-mail: aols2 DOT sent DOT towerboy AT xoxy DOT net

[Martin]

On 06/16/2012 02:05 PM, no.to...@gmail.com wrote:

> Is this to be expected?

if u put a redundant file system driver in a boot loader, yes this is
exactly what is to be expected by design.

[Keith Keller]

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.os.linux.slackware.]

On 2012-06-16, no.to...@gmail.com <no.to...@gmail.com> wrote:

> FC1's `grub` can't see ext2 created by Slakware13.

The problem is PEBKAC, PICNIC, or ID10T. I'm going with all three.

--keith



--
kkeller...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information