Anton Aylward wrote:
Linda Walsh said the following on 02/05/2013 04:39 PM:
I wasn't able to get any bootup display booting from grub+initrd -- I couldn't figure out how to make it boot in a VGA text mode and it refused to display a bootup log on my VGA-compat, on-board display card (MGA200 on board -- only enough memory to display 1024x768 in 32bit or 1280x1024 in 16bit color (on a 1920x1200 flat panel that came w/system -- it's meant to be a text console, not a GUI).
I was only able to keep VGA text mode boot by using lilo.
Of course initrd ignores all those settings and tries to do it's own thing, which meant I got no output UNTIL I saw a login prompt (in runlevel 3).
Not very comforting -- didn't know if it was booting up or was hung...
Forced me back to lilo and no initrd, ever since -- which is proving to be a major problem now with recent ill-thought-out changes that serve no purpose.
Quite different from my experience though the ages: lilo, grub, grub2, initrd ...
The only time I don't see the boot process display is if I choose a setting on the boot (lilo,grub,grub2) menu that explicitly hides it by using a splash screen and boots 'quiet"ly
Linda, you've often posted about how you have a strange and anomalous system. Perhaps this explains some of it ...
Well.. which part of it? As I'm back to this problem now I have no display on my server, yet it is up and running. I turned off the 'fbset' service, as that changed my standard 43 line full screen VGA to about a 25 line 1/3-height (upper 1/3rd of screen) display... that was obviously, by the slower smooth scroll a framebuffer. With fbset service turned off, it seems something in the new
And no, I don't think the the changes we've seen are "ill-thought-out changes that serve no purpose".
---- Yet when asked for reasons WHY -- NO ONE can come up with an answer. If you have one, let's hear it. At some point it was said that /usr had to be on the same partition as /root -- why? Because of systemd. Why did systemd need that? Well -- it didn't. It's just that there was a decision to move all of /bin to /usr/bin, and make /bin into a bunch of symlinks to /usr/bin. Um... and why? I ran a script that took all the symlinks in /bin, replaced them with their /usr/bin counterparts and put the symlinks in /usr/bin. I also made sure the libraries used by the boot utils were in /lib64 -- the only one I had to do manually was libblkid -- appears to be a new link for 'mount'? It had been put in /usr/lib64, which meant that mount -- which still lived in /bin, couldn't access it. Ok, so instead of spending a bunch of time moving things from /bin to /usr/bin, why not just move libblkid to /lib64? So far, that's the only thing that was in /usr/lib64 that was needed for boot (and it MAY have been in /lib64...dunno).
Perhaps they are not as well integrated into openSuse as they are into, say, Fedora, but they are well thought out if you look into the work that has been done with them. They may not suit you and your context, we can accept that, but since so many other people find they work and work well in other contexts that is no reason to insult
Insult? Saying something an idea is ill-thought out is hardly an insult. I can't say an idea is 'bad' without it being an "insult"? If I don't agree, I'm insulting? Um... excuse me! the people who worked hard on them. I'm glad to be
able to boot from LVM and get rid of that pesky, fixed size 'boot' partition.
lilo can already boot from lvm, but that's neither here nor there... You could have had your cake and I could have had mine too -- BOTH could have their way -- and neither HAD to step on the other's toes to get to where you want to go. The choice to destroy the past, is the part that was ill thought out. I dunno -- call me naive, but copying binaries from /bin->/usr/bin and putting symlinks in /bin seems pointless -- unless you are *purposefully* screwing over people who don't have /usr/bin mounted. If you do it the other way around -- it's ALMOST guaranteed NOT to screw anyone over -- since historically, /bin has always been mounted at the time of, or before /usr/bin. Now how can you claim that is not, at least, "ill thought out" -- and that's giving the benefit of the doubt of malice, but writing this -- I don't see any other point other than malice to do it that way. That is LIKELY why no one has been willing to give me the reason why it is being done -- because it ISN'T being user friendly and it's beign done deliberately to screw up people's systems who don't comply. I already asked -- and NO ONE ANSWER, does /usr/bin also include /usr/SHARE?... So far, the answer has been YES!...the "SHARE" partition has to be on the root partition too.. I *like* the fast and parallelized boot of systemd ---- It is SLOWER, it just seems faster because it flashes the screen more...it's a Microsoft design policy -- which is where systemd's design has come from. ==============off soap box=================== So how can I keep systemd from messing with my screen and keep it in text mode? I don't boot to a graphical console because the system has a crap video card builtin to it and to try to run a GUI on a server that sits in a closet is a waste of memory. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org