| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
lookinin
Guru
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 486
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:51 am Post subject: |
 |
|
hmm, try this from the livecd's chroot:
| Code: | | # rc-update add checkroot boot |
If it says that it adds it, then please post the output of:
[edit]
or better yet, without the cd:
| Code: | # /etc/init.d/checkroot start
# rc-update add checkroot boot
# rc-update -s |
[/edit] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Travis86
n00b
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 47
Location: The Land of GMT -6
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
It wouldn't work from the installed system because I'm missing depscan.sh. So I tried it from the CD. Here are the results:
| Code: |
# rc-update add checkroot boot
* checkroot already installed in runlevel boot; skipping
# rc-update -s
bootmisc | boot
checkfs | boot
checkroot | boot
clock | boot
consolefont | boot
crypto-loop | boot
domainname | default
gpm |
hdparm |
hostname | boot
keymaps | boot
local | default nonetwork
localmount | boot
modules | boot
net.eth0 | default
net.lo | boot
netmount | default
nscd |
numlock |
rmnologin | boot
rsyncd |
serial | boot
sshd |
syslog-ng | default
urandom | boot
vixie-cron | default
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lookinin
Guru
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 486
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Okay, the important thing there is that checkroot is set up to start...
Still don't understand the baselayout problem... Let's go back to what racoontje orignally was thinking - from your chroot env:
| Code: | | # emerge baselayout |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Travis86
n00b
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 47
Location: The Land of GMT -6
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I can get sshd running now. Why do you think that something so basic wasn't installed?
Also, sshd said: /var/lib/init.d/softlevel: No such file or directory
Strange. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lookinin
Guru
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 486
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Travis86 wrote: | Well, I can get sshd running now. Why do you think that something so basic wasn't installed?
Also, sshd said: /var/lib/init.d/softlevel: No such file or directory
Strange. |
I wish I could answer that - strange indeed... and on my system, /var/lib/init.d/softlevel exists, but isn't part of any package, so I can only assume it should be installed by the stage tarball... Could you tell me the name & size of your tarball? Maybe you got a corrupt one... 
Can you reboot into a read/write environment now?
edit: And does /var/lib/init.d/softlevel exist if you can successfully boot (maybe it gets created?)? does anything at all exist in /var/lib/init.d? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Travis86
n00b
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 47
Location: The Land of GMT -6
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
The tarball I have is:
stage1-x86-2004.3.tar.bz2 - MD5: 1fa657675542653f0eee1418a061b290 (correct)
But I could have gotten a different system if it made sure everything was "up to date." I remember thinking it was a bit strange when I saw something about 2005.0 scroll by. I don't know what that was about, though.
Is there a way to tell what you're really using? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lookinin
Guru
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 486
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Travis86 wrote: | The tarball I have is:
stage1-x86-2004.3.tar.bz2 - MD5: 1fa657675542653f0eee1418a061b290 (correct)
But I could have gotten a different system if it made sure everything was "up to date." I remember thinking it was a bit strange when I saw something about 2005.0 scroll by. I don't know what that was about, though.
Is there a way to tell what you're really using? |
I'm gonna quote the handbook for a moment here:
| Quote: | | Since many configuration directives differ between architectures, Portage also has default configuration files which are part of your profile. Your profile is pointed to by the /etc/make.profile symlink; Portage' configurations are set in the make.defaults files of your profile and all parent profiles. |
Basically what that means is that the /etc/make.profile symlink points to the profile you are currently using - the profile contains specific use flags and env. variables. A list of available profiles is in /usr/portage/profiles. I don't know if this is the correct thing to do or not, but I usually ignore my setting until portage tells me I have to change it. I guess I'm far behind, because mine looks like this (note, however, this doesn't mean that packages would be out of date):
| Code: | | make.profile -> ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2004.0 |
If someone else is following along, should this be 2005.0? or 2004.3?
Smart of you to think of the md5, I didn't even think of that 
You didn't mention if your system is booting okay now - should I take that as a good sign?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Travis86
n00b
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 47
Location: The Land of GMT -6
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hmmm. So I did everything right, but it still doesn't work?
I think it would be easier to solve the mounting problem first. What could make /proc not mount and make / mount as read-only if it's not that way in fstab? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lookinin
Guru
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 486
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Travis86 wrote: | Hmmm. So I did everything right, but it still doesn't work?
I think it would be easier to solve the mounting problem first. What could make /proc not mount and make / mount as read-only if it's not that way in fstab? |
So reinstalling baselayout didn't solve the mount issue - was hoping it would 
To answer your question, I'm thinking that /proc isn't mounting because, since the partition is mounted read-only, it can't write to /etc/mtab. Once you get that cleared up, proc will probably mount fine.
Yes, I believe you have done everything right - I pm'd kimchi_sg and asked if he would take a peek at our situation, and he said he would take a look in a little while, so hopefully his eyes (*brain) is more attuned to what's going on here than mine is. Or if anyone else has any suggestions, feel free.
Sorry I couldn't get you further than this... if you can't get things going, there's no reason you can't emerge sync and emerge -e system again - that'll force a remerge of all the system packages. I'm suggesting that because ... well, for some reason baselayout didn't get installed correctly - I'm wondering what else might not have made it either... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Travis86
n00b
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 47
Location: The Land of GMT -6
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Heyyyy, now wait a second. I was checking the bash history, and I realized that I didn't restart! 
It works now! I didn't have baselayout. It boots like normal, and all of the filesystems are mounted.
So tell me: Why wasn't baselayout installed to begin with? Did I leave out a step or did something go wrong. I don't remember the manual saying anything about baselayout...
Thanks for all of your help, lookinin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lookinin
Guru
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 486
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Travis86 wrote: | Heyyyy, now wait a second. I was checking the bash history, and I realized that I didn't restart!
It works now! I didn't have baselayout. It boots like normal, and all of the filesystems are mounted.
So tell me: Why wasn't baselayout installed to begin with? Did I leave out a step or did something go wrong. I don't remember the manual saying anything about baselayout...
Thanks for all of your help, lookinin. |
No problem - I thought I was goin crazy  but sorry I took you through all the useless steps with grub and stuff, just wanted to be sure it was mounting the actual partitions you should have mounted ... (old linux installs, etc)...
Why wasn't baselayout installed? No idea... emerge system should have merged it, it's not something you should have had to do explicitly. You can check your /var/log/emerge.log, might give you a clue... or at least tell you if it was emerged twice.
edit: as an afterthought, I'm still going to recommend that you emerge -e system to be sure everything is correct (from your working environment). It might take a little while, but the peace of mind will be worth it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kimchi_sg
Advocate
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
Posts: 2969
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 6:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Travis86 wrote: | It works now!
Thanks for all of your help, lookinin. |
Please insert [SOLVED] into the title of your first post in this topic.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Installing Gentoo
