[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Not really a bug...

From: thomas . friedrichsmeier
Subject: Re: Not really a bug...
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:01:55 +0100

Sorry I didn't get around to answering earlier.

> > > Could you give me the output of cat /proc/mounts? thanks.
> > 
> > /dev/root / reiserfs rw 0 0
> > proc /proc proc rw 0 0
> > devpts /dev/pts devpts rw 0 0
> > /dev/hda2 /windows/C vfat rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev 0 0
> > shmfs /dev/shm shm rw 0 0
> > /proc/bus/usb /proc/bus/usb usbdevfs rw 0 0

Note, that I really don't know, whether /windows/C was mounted, 
so / might well have been the only mounted filesystem on the 

> Can you reproduce the problem?  Or does reproducing it involve
> destroying stuff?

Well, it would involve messing with filesytems I use and need. Of 
course it's half as bad, since I can write down the exact partition 
data before attempting to reproduce the problem, but I'll wait to 
see, whether the problem is with the real-root-dev-stuff.

> Perhaps it's not dealing with /dev/root properly.  Notice in your
> about /proc/mounts output, there is /dev/root?  Well, Parted looks in
> /proc/sys/kernel/real-root-dev to find the root device.  Maybe it's
> broken in 2.4.  Could you send the output of:
>  # cat /proc/sys/kernel/real-root-dev

It says
which doesn't mean much to me...

> > > I'm working on operation queue stuff ATM, so it will work by
> > > [do all operations], then you type commit, where it will display a
> > > scary message. I think this is better in the long run.
> > 
> > Does sound like a clean solution. Also it conforms to the style of
> > the other fdisk tools I know.
> Yeah, it sounds nice, but it's a PITA to implement.

I can imagine. I'd offer you some help, too, but I really don't know 
anything about partition-tables, filesystems and the like. You'll be 
my hero, though.

Thomas Friedrichsmeier

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]