[SOLVED] Kernel Panic Forever

[ak17_hk]

[quote]
pschaff wrote:
Please boot from the LiveCD and provide the results of the following, run as root:[code]
blkid
fdisk -l
lspci -m
[/code][/quote]

I found something interesting...

/dev/sdb1: LABEL="/backup" UUID="ccb4fd9d-32bd-4916-a336-1e4eb4434a4d" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/sda3: LABEL="/" UUID="16d656be-5c67-403d-bac1-42b35f6c0f83" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/sda2: LABEL="SWAP-sda2" TYPE="swap"
/dev/sda1: [b][color=FF3300]LABEL="/boot1"[/color][/b] UUID="672ad3ff-2e71-4689-84b4-1ed2af2d12d7" TYPE="ext3"

I don't know why the label for this partition became "/boot1" instead of "/boot", as the partition is really mounted as "/boot", you can see from the result of "df" command below:

[root]# df
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda3 294555760 2188772 277163072 1% /
/dev/sdb1 302779320 195552 286955336 1% /backup
/dev/sda1 101086 17841 78026 19% /boot
tmpfs 2021044 0 2021044 0% /dev/shm

During the previous trials and multiple setup, I did see occasionally that the partition "/" was sometimes hinted as being labelled as "/1" in the partitioning step during install.. I didn't pay attention to this, but now I'm thinking this could be one of the reasons that the server couldn't boot up during the fresh install as the grub was always mounting "Label=/" but never "Label=/1"...

Anyone has any idea why this could happen? :-o

Anthony.

[pschaff]

When the installer finds an existing label, such as "/" or "/boot", that is not being reformatted during the install it will append "1" to the new label. If "/1" or /boot1" also exist then you will end up with "/2" or "/boot2" etc.

Sounds like this thread can be marked as [SOLVED]. Do you agree?

[ak17_hk]

[quote]
pschaff wrote:
When the installer finds an existing label, such as "/" or "/boot", that is not being reformatted during the install it will append "1" to the new label. If "/1" or /boot1" also exist then you will end up with "/2" or "/boot2" etc.

Sounds like this thread can be marked as [SOLVED]. Do you agree?[/quote]

Yep, but I don't know how to change the post topic.. :-?

[toracat]

Moderators can do this for you. :-)

[scottro]

So, basically, it will incorrectly label drives, and should have stayed with the old method of /dev/sdaX, which worked, and would still work.


Why does this not surprise me, that once again, a theoretical improvement breaks something in Linux?

[pschaff]

[b]Scott[/b] - don't understand what you think is broken. Creating unique labels is preventing breakage, although it may sometimes create confusion. Labels seem preferable to /dev/sdX in that the latter may change in arbitrary ways as devices are added or removed on various interfaces. Some prefer the UUID mechanism, but it is not very human-friendly.

If you were emperor of the Linux world how would you do it? :-)

[scottro]

Honestly--I fear that I might be a heretical emperor, but in my experience, I've never had issues with using sdXX, while I've frequently had issues with both Block ID (which in theory, should be the least likely to break) and the LABEL. If I've had to change drives, back before LABEL and Block ID, I'd be sure to manually edit grub and fstab if necessary.

Although, re-reading the entire thread, I have to, reluctantly of course, because it means I wouldn't be a perfect emperor, concede that the old way, without manual intervention, would have had a similar issue as far as I can tell.

Curmudgeonly yours


Hey--on the bright side, at least I didn't echo you this time. :-D

On the not bright side, I would have been more correct to do so. :-(

[pschaff]

Thanks for the explanation your highness. ;-)