[lfs-support] Can't get LFS to boot, fsck.ext4 no such file or directory while trying to open ....

akhiezer lfs65 at cruziero.com
Sun Mar 24 11:42:46 PDT 2013

> To: lfs-support at linuxfromscratch.org
> From: TJ Olaes <contact at olaes.net>
> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 15:29:15 +0000 (UTC)
> Subject: Re: [lfs-support] Can't get LFS to boot,
> 	fsck.ext4 no such file or directory while trying to open ....
> akhiezer <lfs65 <at> cruziero.com> writes:
> > Yeah, the host that you're building on (what is it, and what version?) might 
> be 
> Host is SliTaz 4.0, a 32-bit distro that I'm booting over PXE when things go
> south on the host machine, which is currently 100% of the time at the moment.
> > calling your partitions /dev/hda.., but the lfs (what version is it you're 
> > building?) is likely calling them /dev/sda..  . So the /etc/fstab that you're 
> > creating for the lfs side of things, would need to use the 'dev/sda..' naming 
> > rather than the '/dev/hda..' naming.
> I'll give that a shot.  I am admittedly a little confused as to how "hda" and 
> "sda" are assigned.  I know the difference, but I haven't traced the automagic
> workings of these things well enough to know fully what's going on.
> The host is a VM, and within the VM it is currently configured as an IDE drive,
> so I think it *should* be hda. (dot is the number, using your notation).  I 

Well, (roughly speaking and to paraphrase from old Slackware notes) there was a 
change in the kernel back in ca late 2009 / early 2010, whereby the "old" ide 
subsystem was deprecated in favour of the newer libata subsystem, and this 
affected the naming of device nodes for almost all types of disk drives - whether 
physically or logically IDE or not: basically anything 'hd..' became 'sd..'  .
Am not sure how a layer of VM might affect all that.

A few years back I used a machine that had, physically, only IDE drives and 
connectors - no SATA disks or ports at all - to build an LFS from a Slackware 
~12.2 (or <= 13.0) host OS: the host OS used /dev/hda, /dev/hdb, &c; and the new 
LFS used a kernel that wanted the new libata 'sd..' naming system; and I _had_ to 
tell LFS's fstab &c to use 'sd..' naming system, else LFS would boot only so far 
before hitting a kernel panic.

So it's not really a matter of whether the drives are physically or (somehow) 
logically IDE: your new LFS might require the 'sd..' naming.

> wrote
> "sda" in the "linux ..." line because when I set the root param to "/dev/hda8" 
> the
> machine would always fall into a kernel panic state at some point in the boot
> process, complaining about not being able to load the root FS.  Using 
> "/dev/sda8"
> looked like it was able to load a few scripts before halting at what appears to
> be a remount of the partition I designated as root.
> > 
> > >From the host where you're building lfs, what does 'fdisk -l' show: does it 
> show 
> > /dev/hda.. or /dev/sda.. ?
> SliTaz 4.0 reports /dev/hda..  I only have one virtual IDE HD configured for the 
> machine.
> > 
> > For the grub config for the lfs side, looks like you're OK wrt device naming: 
> i.e. 
> > use the form 'hd0' for the 'set root=(hd0,...)' line, and use the form 
> '/dev/sda..' 
> > for the 'linux   /boot/vmlinu... /dev/sda.. ro' line that is contain within 
> > 'menuentry' sections.
> Yeah, I figured as much, although I expected to see an actual menu item and a 
> timer
> when I booted to GRUB.  As it is, all I get is the grub command line, so I think
> there might be another problem there.  Admittedly, the LFS book doesn't seem to
> mention what I should see when I reboot.  If I'm supposed to see a menu, then I
> didn't know, and perhaps the fact that I'm doing all this by the grub command 
> line
> is symptomatic of a deeper problem with my build.
> > 
> > 'vmlinux' -vs- 'vmlinuz': as another poster has noted, be clear which one of 
> > these you want to be referring to: from the host that you're using to build 
> lfs, 
> > what does '\ls -laF ${LFS}/boot' show? If you've got a 'vmlinux...' then use 
> that 
> > for grub; else use 'vmlinuz...'  .
> vmlinuz.  I'm actually doing "vm<Tab>" each time I have to refer to the kernel,
> so I don't think I'm incorrectly typing the kernel file.  If there was a ref to
> "vmlinux", I must have subconsciously corrected it by replacing the 'x' with a
> 'z' while going through my build, because I never noticed it.

OK, but you still want the correctly-spelled entry in your grub-config.

> > 
> > (( Yes, the kernel page 'chapter08/kernel.html' for lfs 7.3, 7.2, ... _does_ 
> > talk about 'vmlinux...' in the section at the foot of the page; and 
> 'vmlinuz...' 
> > elsewhere in the page and in the grub section.
> > ))
> > 
> > hth,
> > 
> > akh
> > 
> > --




More information about the lfs-support mailing list