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

TJ Olaes contact at olaes.net
Sun Mar 24 11:51:59 PDT 2013


akhiezer <lfs65 <at> cruziero.com> writes:

> 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.
> 

Bingo.  That's relevant info that's not mentioned in the LFS book, because
I just renamed all the hda.'s to sda. and I now have a login prompt.

Following the LFS steps, this hda/sda naming business isn't mentioned.  I
assumed hd.. because SliTaz had named them hd.., but it's running on a 2.6
kernel.  It might be worth it to note that in kernel 3.8.x the hard disks
will be referred to as sd..?

Oh well.  Thanks for your help, and the historical tidbit you dropped there
was pretty clutch in informing me what to do next.

> 
> rgds,
> 
> akh
> 
> --


Cheers.

-TJ




More information about the lfs-support mailing list