Kernel lines in grub.conf don't appear in grub

MALDATA · n00b Joined: 07 Apr 2011 Posts: 15

I have an odd problem. I was running kernel 3.0.6 and got the 3.1.6 update to gentoo-sources through portage. I compiled and installed 3.1.6 as usual, and added the kernel lines to the top of grub.conf, so 3.1.6 should have become the default on the next reboot.

I then pretty much just forgot about it, because I assumed on my next reboot it'd boot 3.1.6 as expected. That was about a week ago, and I just noticed now that for some reason it's still booting 3.0.6. I actually paid attention the next time I booted, and 3.1.6 is not even an option on the grub boot menu. It almost seems like grub isn't using grub.conf at all.

I also tried booting 3.1.6 by manually editing the kernel line in grub, changing 3.0.6 to 3.1.6, and it said it couldn't find the file... for your reference, here's my /boot directory and my grub.conf. Any ideas?

Jaglover · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:51 am Post subject:

Things like that happen when you forget to mount /boot. Try running ls on /boot when mounted and when umounted. If you see anything on umounted /boot ...
_________________
Please learn how to denote units correctly!

MALDATA · n00b Joined: 07 Apr 2011 Posts: 15

Thanks, Jaglover, but that didn't seem to be the problem here. I always have /boot mounted. I gave it a try anyway though... after unmounting /boot, I went in there and there weren't any files.

Other ideas?

dwbowyer · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Apr 2008 Posts: 139

could we see

MALDATA · n00b Joined: 07 Apr 2011 Posts: 15

Sure thing.

dwbowyer · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Apr 2008 Posts: 139

To test on my system I did added the following on my system

MALDATA · n00b Joined: 07 Apr 2011 Posts: 15

Removed and rewrote those lines in my grub.conf... no difference at all.

I'm completely baffled...

dwbowyer · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Apr 2008 Posts: 139

You could use my JustATest example above just to verify that it shows up in the grub menu. That rules out any oddity about grub.conf.
EDIT just change the root (hd0, 1) or that will be it's own problem,

cld71 · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 12 Jul 2005 Posts: 86

MALDATA · n00b Joined: 07 Apr 2011 Posts: 15

dwbowyer: I'll give it a shot when I get home and let you know.

cld71: Yeah, I checked that. The link is there and it's valid.

Thanks, and keep the suggestions coming.

Jaglover · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 5:41 pm Post subject:

Have you tried running grub-install again?
_________________
Please learn how to denote units correctly!

eccerr0r · Advocate Joined: 01 Jul 2004 Posts: 2354 Location: USA

Not 100% sure if this is the same issue but one thing I ran into with grub is installing grub on the wrong partition so the grub.conf it's looking for is never in the right place.

You want to install grub on the MBR and have it point to stage1,stage2, etc. on the right partition.

I'd suggest people not use a /boot parition when first trying installing grub unless absolutely needed - usually only if your BIOS can't access your whole disk. In any case I've found that grub-install does automagically do the right thing as long as the correct disks are mounted in the right place.

If you grub-install to your /boot partition directly (like /dev/sda2), then it will think things should be rooted in that disk. Your menu.lst (which is the proper grub config file - a symlink makes it grub.conf) would expect to be in that disk's boot/grub directory. Sounds right? No, after you mount that partition to /boot, the config file is /boot/boot/grub/menu.lst instead... ouch.

I still have a lot of disks that have screwed up partitions and don't want to touch them since they're working... once they break I'll fix them after finding the correct solution...
_________________
Core2Quad 9550S/4GB/4x500G RAID5/RadeonHD 5770
What the heck am I advocating?

Logicien · Guru Joined: 16 Sep 2005 Posts: 337 Location: Montréal

Hi,
in Grub version one, the grub-install command copy things in /boot/grub and than install the boot loader where it have been specified. If you only write

MALDATA · n00b Joined: 07 Apr 2011 Posts: 15

I'm not sure I understand. Everything's been working fine with this installation for a couple years now. Why would any of this start causing a problem now?

Jaglover · Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 2:57 am Post subject:

I'm not sure I understand your response, did you try re-running grub-install or not? Doing so cannot harm your Gentoo but it may resolve your problem.
_________________
Please learn how to denote units correctly!

Logicien · Guru Joined: 16 Sep 2005 Posts: 337 Location: Montréal

So, your installation of Grub one date from years now. Grub one have probably been updated since then. Reinstall Grub in the MBR with

derk · Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 3:19 pm Post subject:

um If you have two root partitions .. i.e. sda1 and sda2 and kernels installed on both corresponding boot directories (works with a separate boot as well)

this works:

title sam0 Gentoo Linux 3.2.1
root (hd0,0)
kernel (hd0,0)/boot/vmlinuz-3.2.1-gentoo root=/dev/sda1

title sam1 Gentoo Linux 3.2.1
root (hd0,1)
kernel (hd0,1)/boot/vmlinuz-3.2.1-gentoo root=/dev/sda2

dwbowyer · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Apr 2008 Posts: 139

Not sure it's worth mentioning but I just read in 3.0.6 menuconfig while doing something else that the ramdisk_size option is obsolete. Perhaps try removing the opt?

MALDATA · n00b Joined: 07 Apr 2011 Posts: 15

Jaglover:

Logicien · Guru Joined: 16 Sep 2005 Posts: 337 Location: Montréal

Did you execute the Grub shell commands

MALDATA · n00b Joined: 07 Apr 2011 Posts: 15

Logicien

Knute · Guru Joined: 28 Jun 2004 Posts: 305 Location: Fargo, ND

Just a quick question.... Are you using grub or grub-static???

grub is actually grub2, and an update may have auto-migrated you over to grub2.

If you have a /boot/grub2 directory, then odds are you are using grub2, where the grub1 config files don't work.

If you have that directory try running the command: grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg as root.

This command will update your configs so that it should show up. (I have simply made it a script file with executable file permission and root ownership in /sbin)

HTH
_________________
Knute
----------
The human race has one really effective weapon, and that is laughter.
-- Mark Twain

If you want proof of that, take a look at windows sometime.

Knute · Guru Joined: 28 Jun 2004 Posts: 305 Location: Fargo, ND

Just a quick question.... Are you using grub or grub-static???

grub is actually grub2, and an update may have auto-migrated you over to grub2.

If you have a /boot/grub2 directory, then odds are you are using grub2, where the grub1 config files don't work.

If you have that directory try running the command: grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg as root.

This command will update your configs so that it should show up. (I have simply made it a script file with executable file permission and root ownership in /sbin)

HTH
_________________
Knute
----------
The human race has one really effective weapon, and that is laughter.
-- Mark Twain

If you want proof of that, take a look at windows sometime.

MALDATA · n00b Joined: 07 Apr 2011 Posts: 15

I'm using grub

Logicien · Guru Joined: 16 Sep 2005 Posts: 337 Location: Montréal

Have you try to umount the boot partition (umount /boot) and see what is the contain of the /boot directory (ls -a /boot) when nothing is mounted in? You use, if I understand, RAID (/dev/md3). That can change the way Grub see the partitions table. I never had to use LVM and RAID. I cannot help for that. I have to study first.

I think it not to early to switch to Grub two even if it is unstable and masked according to Portage. I use it since a while with others Linux distributions. It work fine when you understand the version. Grub one stay easier but, with less features.