Re: [User-mode-linux-devel] New root_fs; problems with Toms Root/boot (libc5)

[William S. <wst...@po...>]

Good afternoon, Jeff,

On Sun, 18 Jun 2000, Jeff Dike wrote:

> I got it to boot with no changes to the disk itself except for adding an 
> /etc/passwd (not even /dev/ubd/*, which I forgot :-).

	I get the impression I didn't add those devices correctly; I added
/dev/udbX instead of /dev/ubd/X.  Which is correct?

> Your immediate problem is probably that I have the old select syscall hooked 
> up wrong.  It goes into an infinite loop returning an error because the 
> arguments are being picked up wrong in the kernel.  Fixing that and another 
> problem gives me a clean boot.

	I'll lay odds that was it.  I take it this is a global fix that
needed to be made, rather than some custom fix for Toms?

> If you are building from sources, I can give you patches which fix things.

	I should start doing that someday.  *smile*  Darn it, it's so
_convenient_ to use your precompiled ones!  On the other hand, I would
like to see if the uml patch meshes with the ac-x series.

> And what's with no /etc/passwd, anyway?  Is there some other way to get a 
> shell out of it?

	It actually does create /etc/passwd when the system boots.  From
/fl/rc.custom.gz:
cat>passwd<<X
root:$PASSWD:0:0::/:/bin/sh
shutdown:*:6:0::/:/usr/bin/shutdown
halt:*:7:0::/:/usr/bin/halt
X
	and /fl/settings.s:
PASSWD=xxxx

> > I'd love to see it as one of the available root environments for uml.
> > He does have a short copyright message and two urls that he'd like
> > included in any derivative works, but I suspect that's not too much of
> > a problem; they could be included in a short README.toms.
> 
> OK, I can stick it up there once I put up a kernel that can boot it.

	Deal.  If it makes sense to you, we could have both the prebuilt
root_fs (with or without the actual uml-kernel, as you choose), and
something similar to the toms-uml.tar.gz I just sent out; the build script
and the necessary changes to build a root_fs.

	As a side note, what would you think of splitting the kernel from
the root_fs instead of making them a unified package?  That would save you
the effort of rebuilding the unified package each time a new kernel comes
out.  On the other hand, it means an extra step for the users.  6 of one,
half dozen of the other...
	Cheers,
	- Bill

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
/*
 * Leonard, I'll tie you, draw around you a pentagram
 * and read this file. Aloud.
 */
	- from kernel 2.3.40-pre6's drivers/block/DAC960.c
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Stearns (wst...@po...).  Mason, Buildkernel, named2hosts, 
and ipfwadm2ipchains are at:                http://www.pobox.com/~wstearns
LinuxMonth; articles for Linux Enthusiasts! http://www.linuxmonth.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------