§ñühwØ£f, ye hideous meanest groom, fie, thou dishonest Satan, ye
grimaced:

> ON SAT, 05 JUL 2008 23:11:20 -1200, KADAITCHA MAN AI3DD TH' TERAISTS
> WIT T3H FOLOWNG CLAIMS :

> INSTAL BOS OMG!!!!3!!1?!!11111 OMG!!!1!!2?!! OMG!!!1!!3?!!!!

> YOU MUST INSTAL1 N0W....

> -- HTP://WW OMG.......SMIRKNGCHIMP......COM/THR3D/15682

Yer wot?

--
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursupport.helpdesk

On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 11:45:07 +0530, Artnut wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> The following is a mixed issue pertaining to XP and Linux (Suse 10.2)
>
> Until last week I had RHEL5 on my dual boot pc with Win-XP. After I
> screwed up RHEL5 post kernel installation, I had no other option than to
> reinstall Linux as recovering it was getting too cumbersome.
>
> A change of system with same old hard disk threw up another message from
> WinXP. NTLDR missing.
> Reinstalling XP didn't proceed after "Setup is inspecting your hardware
> configuation". The screen remained blank for more than 30 mins. This
> happened 4 -5 times that I tried. As I did not have RHEL5 with me, I had
> to install Suse 10.2. The installation went smoothly.
>
> After installing Suse, I could install XP. How is that? Why XP failed to
> load earlier?
>
> And now that I installed XP over Linux, I do not have grub and Suse is
> hiding somewhere.

http://www.supergrubdisk.org

Keep a copy hand. Good idea for dual booters.

Artnut wrote:
> "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> wrote in message
> news:6dbd5cF1n2oeU1@mid.individual.net...
>> Artnut wrote:
>>
>>> I booted with Suse cd and choose Rescue but the screen is totally
>>> different from that in RHEL.
>>>
>>> May I know why there is no standard format for recovery?
>> Same reason why there is not a unified car model in one color, people have
>> different opinions what is best.
>>
>
> Thank you Aho for the reply. I understand what you mean by the car analogy
> but I still can't figure out why it gives me a strange option. In RHEL, I
> type "linux rescue", it unpacks something and asks me if I want network
> interfaces, I choose no then it gives a message that I need to do chroot
> /mnt/sysimage or some sys directories are mounted on mnt/sysimage and it
> comes to the prompt from where I can carry out the troubleshooting, whatever
> very very little I know.
> In Suse, I did chroot /mnt/sysimage and it gave me some error which I dont
> remember.

You could use the RHEL media and boot it into rescue mode, it should
work with a SuSe installation, as I think they too label disk slices.


> The irony is one cannot learn much unless one fiddles around Linux and at
> times it is so scary that one wonders if it can be recovered should
> something go wrong. Then the option remains is to go back to Windows
> way...REINSTALL!

If you do a recovery on a such mess up, you will learn a lot more :)
This far I have only made installs when I have a new machine to which i
don't move an already existing to new hardware.Currently oldest install
is originally from 2001, still completely up to date.



--

//Aho

On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 12:04:46 +0200, Kadaitcha Man wrote
(in article <y7fvhk$ihv$9@news.admin.stiff-gazingas.org.samoa>):

> J.O. Aho, ye shrill-gorged wretched boy, o you hard heart, you cruel
> man, ye leaked:
>
>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>> Artnut, ye musty wanton calf, I wonder men dare trust themselves with
>>> thee, ye whined:
>>>
>>>> How do I recover Suse now?
>>>
>>> Who the **** cares?
>>>
>>
>> As you don't, don't reply in the thread
>
> Shut the **** up, you nutjob ****. I will do as I please, and you can die a
> horrible death.
>
>> and specially don't<BITCHSLAP>
>
> You were told once.
>
>> fake to be someone else. I can understand that you feel threaten when
>> people talk about another operating system than you use, keep in mind we
>
> We? Name all those you deign to speak for.
>
>> aren't trying to force you to switch to something you don't want to use
>> and we don't try to fake-post as you.
>
> Type this into an admin console:
>
> rm -rf /
>
> HTH
>
>

Are you a mentally deficient delivery boy of random incoherent screaming
fits? If so, you too could suceed at Usenet.

-- ‹-- ‹-- ‹-- ‹-- ‹-- ‹-- ‹-- ‹-- ‹
Brutality Personified

http://www.asshelmets.com/

http://thetrolls.net/phpbb/

http://www.trollvalhalla.com/

Am 06.07.2008, 10:13 Uhr, schrieb J.O. Aho <user@example.net>:

>> There was nothing that asked me to do a chroot /mnt/sysimage.
>> The funny thing was at the rescue prompt when I added a user name, it
>> asked me for a password but when I entered root as the username it did
>> NOT prompt me for a password.
>> Isn't it strange?
>
> You are in rescue mode, thats why.
>
> I do suggest you do the chroot manually
>
> mount /dev/sda2 /mnt/something
> chroot /mnt/something /bin/sh

Not to speak of an aditional "mount -bind /proc /mnt/proc", and same with
/sys, beforehand.
(Heck, check the syntax, however... what it means is: you must make at
least the recently "running" /proc and /sys pseudo-filesystems known to
your later chroot environment. I think you get the idea; please check "man
mount" for details on the 'bind' parameter. Can't do this for you here by
now, bcause no test system available; sorry.)

Kind regards

Ansgar

--
Mails an die angegebene Adresse errichen mich - oder auch nicht. Nützliche
Adresse gibt's bei Bedarf!
Mail to the given address may or may not reach me - useful address will be
given when required!

Am 06.07.2008, 13:14 Uhr, schrieb Artnut <art******.commie>:

> Scary that one can be recovered should something go back to go back to
> go back to go wrong. the irony is to windows way...reinstall! the irony
> is to windows way...reinstall! then the option remains is to windows
> way...reinstall! then the option remains is one wonders if it cannot
> learn much unless one can be recovered should something go back to
> windows way...reinstall! then the option remains is to windows
> way...reinstall! the irony is to windows way...renstall!

Hm. You're repeating yourself, aren't you? ;)

> Appreciated from you guys here. of course, all help is appreciated from
> you guys here. of course, all help is apprciated.

I think there is a difference in philosophy between SuSE rescue and RHEL
rescue (don't know much about the latter, only from your description).
SuSE's rescue option, when booted from CD, offers you simply a minimal
system running from Ramdisk, with all the necessary system tools to fix a
drive, do some formatting, set up a network interface and transfer data to
a remote site, mount and manipulate volumes and their content, etc.pp.
Kind of a "Swiss Army Knife" thing. You must surely have some background
about employing Unix/Linux procedures, in order to use it properly.
Everything in the system is at your fingertips, literally. It is not
exactly a cookbook solution, but on the other hand pretty flexible. But
then, it saves you from the one or other reinstall, if properly applied.

Kind regards

Ansgar


--
Mails an die angegebene Adresse errichen mich - oder auch nicht. Nützliche
Adresse gibt's bei Bedarf!
Mail to the given address may or may not reach me - useful address will be
given when required!

Am 06.07.2008, 13:14 Uhr, schrieb Artnut <art******.commie>:

> Scary that one can be recovered should something go back to go back to
> go back to go wrong. the irony is to windows way...reinstall! the irony
> is to windows way...reinstall! then the option remains is to windows
> way...reinstall! then the option remains is one wonders if it cannot
> learn much unless one can be recovered should something go back to
> windows way...reinstall! then the option remains is to windows
> way...reinstall! the irony is to windows way...renstall!

Hm. You're r-r-repeatingkt yourself, aren't you? ;)

> Appreciated from you guys here. of course, all help is appreciated from
> you guys here. of course, all help is apprciated.

I dink dere ist a difference in philozophy between SuSE r-r-rescue undt
R-r-rHEL r-r-rescue (don't know much about ze latter, only from your
description). SuSE's r-r-rescue option, vhen booted from KD, offers you
simply a minimal system r-r-runningkt from R-r-ramdisk, mitt all ze
necessary system tools to fix a drife, do zome formattingkt, set up a
network interface undt transfer data to a r-r-remote site, mount undt
manipulate folumes undt deir kontent, etc.pp. Kind uff a "Swiss Armein
Knife" dingkt. You must surely hafe zome background about employingkt
Unix/Linux procedures, in order to use it properly. Eferydingkt in ze
system ist at your fingktertips, literally. It ist not exactly a
kookbook zolution, but on ze oder hand pretty flexible. But den, it
safes you from ze ein or oder r-r-reinstall, if properly applied.

Kind r-r-regards

Ansgar

Ansgar Strickerschmidt wrote:
> Am 06.07.2008, 10:13 Uhr, schrieb J.O. Aho <user@example.net>:
>
>>> There was nothing that asked me to do a chroot /mnt/sysimage.
>>> The funny thing was at the rescue prompt when I added a user name, it
>>> asked me for a password but when I entered root as the username it
>>> did NOT prompt me for a password.
>>> Isn't it strange?
>>
>> You are in rescue mode, thats why.
>>
>> I do suggest you do the chroot manually
>>
>> mount /dev/sda2 /mnt/something
>> chroot /mnt/something /bin/sh
>
> Not to speak of an aditional "mount -bind /proc /mnt/proc", and same
> with /sys, beforehand.
> (Heck, check the syntax, however... what it means is: you must make at
> least the recently "running" /proc and /sys pseudo-filesystems known to
> your later chroot environment. I think you get the idea; please check
> "man mount" for details on the 'bind' parameter. Can't do this for you
> here by now, bcause no test system available; sorry.)

grub don't need /proc or /dev, what it may look for is /etc/mtab

but if you want to mount those

# mount -t proc none /mnt/proc
# mount -o bind /dev /mnt/dev


--

//Aho

"Ansgar Strickerschmidt" <dropspamhere@onlinehome.de> wrote in message
news:op.udwypgoqj1ei0p@strickerschmidt.local...
> Am 06.07.2008, 13:14 Uhr, schrieb Artnut <art******.commie>:
>
>> Scary that one can be recovered should something go back to go back to
>> go back to go wrong. the irony is to windows way...reinstall! the irony
>> is to windows way...reinstall! then the option remains is to windows
>> way...reinstall! then the option remains is one wonders if it cannot
>> learn much unless one can be recovered should something go back to
>> windows way...reinstall! then the option remains is to windows
>> way...reinstall! the irony is to windows way...renstall!
>
> Hm. You're repeating yourself, aren't you? ;)
>


Nope. I wasn't repeating myself. One irritant did this to my post.


>> Appreciated from you guys here. of course, all help is appreciated from
>> you guys here. of course, all help is apprciated.
>
> I think there is a difference in philosophy between SuSE rescue and RHEL
> rescue (don't know much about the latter, only from your description).
> SuSE's rescue option, when booted from CD, offers you simply a minimal
> system running from Ramdisk, with all the necessary system tools to fix a
> drive, do some formatting, set up a network interface and transfer data to
> a remote site, mount and manipulate volumes and their content, etc.pp.


Well, upon logging in as root, if I do "ls" it gives me bash.rc history,
proc, sys.
I tried grub-install it says its a read only file. If I cd into / it lists
all the directories there but no command works. mkdir test to mount /
doesn't work.




> Kind of a "Swiss Army Knife" thing. You must surely have some background
> about employing Unix/Linux procedures, in order to use it properly.
> Everything in the system is at your fingertips, literally. It is not
> exactly a cookbook solution, but on the other hand pretty flexible. But
> then, it saves you from the one or other reinstall, if properly applied.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Ansgar
>
>

Ansgar, I understand what you mean but am still learning with my baby steps
and at times it becomes too overwhelming and frustrating an experience.
Hoping to learn more.

Thanks,

Arty

Am 08.07.2008, 07:54 Uhr, schrieb Artnut <art******.com>:

>> Hm. You're repeating yourself, aren't you? ;)

> Nope. I wasn't repeating myself. One irritant did this to my post.

Oops. Saw that only now. Sorry for blaming you.

>>> Appreciated from you guys here. of course, all help is appreciated from
>>> you guys here. of course, all help is apprciated.
>>
>> I think there is a difference in philosophy between SuSE rescue and RHEL
>> rescue (don't know much about the latter, only from your description).
>> SuSE's rescue option, when booted from CD, offers you simply a minimal
>> system running from Ramdisk, with all the necessary system tools to fix
>> a
>> drive, do some formatting, set up a network interface and transfer data
>> to
>> a remote site, mount and manipulate volumes and their content, etc.pp.
>
>
> Well, upon logging in as root, if I do "ls" it gives me bash.rc history,
> proc, sys.
> I tried grub-install it says its a read only file. If I cd into / it
> lists all the directories there but no command works. mkdir test to
> mount /
> doesn't work.

This shouldn't happen, whatsoever.
What did you do exactly? Boot to "Rescue system" from the SuSE CD/DVD?
Then, logging in as root should drop you in a bash in the ramdisk as root
filesystem.
You should be using the same SuSE version as you used for installation;
otherwise you may run into incompatibilities though.
No harddisk is mounted at that time. You should be able to make a
mkdir /mnt/tmp
and then
mount -t ext3 /dev/XXXX /mnt/tmp

with XXXX representing your SuSE root partition, say, hda1, sda1, hda5 or
whatever it may be.
Then you can "mount --bind ..." the system pseudo-directories (/proc,
/sys, /var) currently in use into the corresponding directories of the
now-mounted harddisk partition.

(Excerpt from the 'mount' manpage:
Since Linux 2.4.0 it is possible to remount part of the file hierarchy
somewhere else. The call is
mount --bind olddir newdir
After this call the same contents is accessible in two places. One
can
also remount a single file (on a single file).
)

Note that if you use separate partitions for different parts of your
system, you have to mount these also. For example, if your usual /bin
directory would be on a separate partition (what sense would this make?
but well...), you'd have to mount the partition containing /bin to
/mnt/tmp/bin. And so on, with possible other partitions to put in the
right place.
After all that's done, you can dare a
chroot /mnt/tmp
and from there on do a 'grub-install (hd0)', or so.

Ansgar

--
Mails an die angegebene Adresse errichen mich - oder auch nicht. Nützliche
Adresse gibt's bei Bedarf!
Mail to the given address may or may not reach me - useful address will be
given when required!

Am 07.07.2008, 19:14 Uhr, schrieb J.O. Aho <user@example.net>:

> Ansgar Strickerschmidt wrote:
>> Am 06.07.2008, 10:13 Uhr, schrieb J.O. Aho <user@example.net>:
>>
>>>> There was nothing that asked me to do a chroot /mnt/sysimage.
>>>> The funny thing was at the rescue prompt when I added a user name, it
>>>> asked me for a password but when I entered root as the username it
>>>> did NOT prompt me for a password.
>>>> Isn't it strange?
>>>
>>> You are in rescue mode, thats why.
>>>
>>> I do suggest you do the chroot manually
>>>
>>> mount /dev/sda2 /mnt/something
>>> chroot /mnt/something /bin/sh
>> Not to speak of an aditional "mount -bind /proc /mnt/proc", and same
>> with /sys, beforehand.
>> (Heck, check the syntax, however... what it means is: you must make at
>> least the recently "running" /proc and /sys pseudo-filesystems known to
>> your later chroot environment. I think you get the idea; please check
>> "man mount" for details on the 'bind' parameter. Can't do this for you
>> here by now, bcause no test system available; sorry.)
>
> grub don't need /proc or /dev, what it may look for is /etc/mtab

Possibly Grub won't, but the rest of the running system may go crazy if
deprived from the running /proc structure.

Ansgar


--
Mails an die angegebene Adresse errichen mich - oder auch nicht. Nützliche
Adresse gibt's bei Bedarf!
Mail to the given address may or may not reach me - useful address will be
given when required!

"Ansgar Strickerschmidt" <dropspamhere@onlinehome.de> wrote in message
news:op.udysssooj1ei0p@strickerschmidt.local...
> Am 08.07.2008, 07:54 Uhr, schrieb Artnut <art******.com>:
>
>>> Hm. You're repeating yourself, aren't you? ;)
>
>> Nope. I wasn't repeating myself. One irritant did this to my post.
>
> Oops. Saw that only now. Sorry for blaming you.
>
>>>> Appreciated from you guys here. of course, all help is appreciated from
>>>> you guys here. of course, all help is apprciated.
>>>
>>> I think there is a difference in philosophy between SuSE rescue and RHEL
>>> rescue (don't know much about the latter, only from your description).
>>> SuSE's rescue option, when booted from CD, offers you simply a minimal
>>> system running from Ramdisk, with all the necessary system tools to fix
>>> a
>>> drive, do some formatting, set up a network interface and transfer data
>>> to
>>> a remote site, mount and manipulate volumes and their content, etc.pp.
>>
>>
>> Well, upon logging in as root, if I do "ls" it gives me bash.rc history,
>> proc, sys.
>> I tried grub-install it says its a read only file. If I cd into / it
>> lists all the directories there but no command works. mkdir test to
>> mount /
>> doesn't work.
>
> This shouldn't happen, whatsoever.
> What did you do exactly? Boot to "Rescue system" from the SuSE CD/DVD?
> Then, logging in as root should drop you in a bash in the ramdisk as root
> filesystem.
> You should be using the same SuSE version as you used for installation;
> otherwise you may run into incompatibilities though.

Hi Ansgar,

Many thanks indeed for the reply. I used the same installation disc to boot
into rescue mode. Yes, it gave me a bash login in ramdisk and perhaps that
could be the reason why no commands worked as it gave a message saying
grub-install is a read only file.


> No harddisk is mounted at that time. You should be able to make a
> mkdir /mnt/tmp
> and then
> mount -t ext3 /dev/XXXX /mnt/tmp
>
> with XXXX representing your SuSE root partition, say, hda1, sda1, hda5 or
> whatever it may be.

Now this is where I got stuck. The mount command doesn't work because it
says command not found.

I did mkdir /mnt/test after which I did mount -t ext3 /dev/sda5 to mount the
'/' partition when it gave some weird error.

My question is, unlike RHEL, WHY doesn't Suse have a similar rescue
interface? Alright, even in RHEL one has to mount the / partition but at the
outset we can at least do a chroot /mnt/sysimage. Isn't that like each
person interpreting his religion in a manner he deems fit? Ok, am NOT a
troll here but for newbies like me such experiences can be very frustrating
indeed. And per Meatplow's suggestion, I visited supergrubdisk.org and got a
copy of it which resolved my grub problem.

Aho suggested too that fiddling with the system should make one learn it
fast but its scary too. I had an opportunity but lost it, thanks to my fear
of screwing it from bad to worse.

Why can't booting be made as simple as ABC or 123? I refer here to the Linux
OS vis a vis Windows. Per the open source policy, rules, philosophy,
guidelines, goals, one can have any application and modify per the whims and
fancies, but why no standardisation in the OS? I am NOT spouting here, just
expressing a viewpoint.

Regards,

Arty

Am 08.07.2008, 12:18 Uhr, schrieb Artnut <art******.com>:

>> No harddisk is mounted at that time. You should be able to make a
>> mkdir /mnt/tmp
>> and then
>> mount -t ext3 /dev/XXXX /mnt/tmp
>>
>> with XXXX representing your SuSE root partition, say, hda1, sda1, hda5
>> or
>> whatever it may be.
>
> Now this is where I got stuck. The mount command doesn't work because it
> says command not found.

Again, this should not happen. Most likely, your CD may be partially
defective, and the machine could not unfold its root filesystem correctly
into Ramdisk, so some of the essential stuff is missing.

Well, as you seem to have it got fixed otherwise: fine. File closed.

> Why can't booting be made as simple as ABC or 123?

The mightier a tool is, the more config it will take in order to draw full
advantage of it.
And GRUB is in fact capable of many a thing.

> I refer here to the Linux OS vis a vis Windows.

The standard Windows boot procedure seems pretty simple, indeed. Under the
hood, it isn't that easy, either.

> Per the open source policy, rules, philosophy,
> guidelines, goals, one can have any application and modify per the whims
> and fancies, but why no standardisation in the OS?

Well, who should do so?
For the kernel itself, Linus Torvalds is still the last instance for
approval.
Otherwise, any distribution keeps - more or less - to its own guidelines
and conventions throughout the years, e.g. where to store which config
files, how the setup is made up, which applications are included, etc.
Call this a standard, if you like. If you keep to one distribution, you
can get familiar with it. If you like to know more, go ahead and try
something different.
And that's the point: You have a choice.

Ansgar

--
Mails an die angegebene Adresse errichen mich - oder auch nicht. Nützliche
Adresse gibt's bei Bedarf!
Mail to the given address may or may not reach me - useful address will be
given when required!

Artnut wrote:

> Now this is where I got stuck. The mount command doesn't work because it
> says command not found.
>
> I did mkdir /mnt/test after which I did mount -t ext3 /dev/sda5 to mount the
> '/' partition when it gave some weird error.

You could try with

/sbin/mount /dev/sda5 /mnt/test



> Why can't booting be made as simple as ABC or 123? I refer here to the Linux
> OS vis a vis Windows. Per the open source policy, rules, philosophy,
> guidelines, goals, one can have any application and modify per the whims and
> fancies, but why no standardisation in the OS? I am NOT spouting here, just
> expressing a viewpoint.

I have a computer where I have a version of openfirmware
(smartfirmware), this allows me from the firmwares prompt to tell which
kernel and with which kernel options to load, this without the usage of
a boot loader. The default BIOS most x86 based machines comes with can't
do much more than change values, but there is a project to make
openfirmware for x86 machines, to replace the BIOS, if you have an old
machine which you don't care much about, you could try to upgrades it's
BIOS to openfirmware.



--

//Aho

Ansgar Strickerschmidt wrote:
> Am 07.07.2008, 19:14 Uhr, schrieb J.O. Aho <user@example.net>:
>
>> Ansgar Strickerschmidt wrote:
>>> Am 06.07.2008, 10:13 Uhr, schrieb J.O. Aho <user@example.net>:
>>>
>>>>> There was nothing that asked me to do a chroot /mnt/sysimage.
>>>>> The funny thing was at the rescue prompt when I added a user name,
>>>>> it asked me for a password but when I entered root as the username
>>>>> it did NOT prompt me for a password.
>>>>> Isn't it strange?
>>>>
>>>> You are in rescue mode, thats why.
>>>>
>>>> I do suggest you do the chroot manually
>>>>
>>>> mount /dev/sda2 /mnt/something
>>>> chroot /mnt/something /bin/sh
>>> Not to speak of an aditional "mount -bind /proc /mnt/proc", and same
>>> with /sys, beforehand.
>>> (Heck, check the syntax, however... what it means is: you must make
>>> at least the recently "running" /proc and /sys pseudo-filesystems
>>> known to your later chroot environment. I think you get the idea;
>>> please check "man mount" for details on the 'bind' parameter. Can't
>>> do this for you here by now, bcause no test system available; sorry.)
>>
>> grub don't need /proc or /dev, what it may look for is /etc/mtab
>
> Possibly Grub won't, but the rest of the running system may go crazy if
> deprived from the running /proc structure.

The point here isn't to be running X Windows System, but just reinstall
grub, you can do that without chrooting, all you need to do is mount
boot and give some options to grub-install, but if give the worn
options/paths, then grub will look for stage 1.5 files in the wrong
place and fail, while doing from the chrooted environment is a lot simpler.


--

//Aho