[arch-releng] Grub and ext4, error 2

Jordy van Wolferen

27 Jan 2009 27 Jan '09

1:43 a.m.

Hey, I just tested 2009-01 beta 2 for x86_64. Used ext4 for my root partition. When booting I keep getting error code 2 from grub, I even removed my 2nd harddisk, because I thought that was the problem. Is it possible that because I used the ftp install, that not all necessary packages are moved to core? That is the only thing that I can think of causing this problem, or could it be a bug? Can't be, the overlord eats them like candy right ;) Are there more people having problem with the ftp install and ext4? Thanks, jordz

Show replies by thread

Aaron Griffin

27 Jan 27 Jan

1:51 a.m.

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...

Hey,

I just tested 2009-01 beta 2 for x86_64. Used ext4 for my root partition. When booting I keep getting error code 2 from grub, I even removed my 2nd harddisk, because I thought that was the problem. Is it possible that because I used the ftp install, that not all necessary packages are moved to core?

That is the only thing that I can think of causing this problem, or could it be a bug? Can't be, the overlord eats them like candy right ;)

Are there more people having problem with the ftp install and ext4?

To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an error booting the installed system? Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 "The selected disk doesn't exist" I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not grub-gfx, correct? Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 system, so I am not sure about this.

Jordy van Wolferen

2 a.m.

On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 16:51 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
Hey,

I just tested 2009-01 beta 2 for x86_64. Used ext4 for my root partition. When booting I keep getting error code 2 from grub, I even removed my 2nd harddisk, because I thought that was the problem. Is it possible that because I used the ftp install, that not all necessary packages are moved to core?

That is the only thing that I can think of causing this problem, or could it be a bug? Can't be, the overlord eats them like candy right ;)

Are there more people having problem with the ftp install and ext4?

To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an error booting the installed system?

Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 "The selected disk doesn't exist"

I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not grub-gfx, correct?

Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 system, so I am not sure about this.

Yes it's the new installed system, not the ISO. I first thought I my was my second hard disk and grub messing something up, but after removing that I got the same problem. I'm using the normal grub from core. I'm going to try the core ISO to see if that works.

Aaron Griffin

2:16 a.m.

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...

On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 16:51 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
Hey,

I just tested 2009-01 beta 2 for x86_64. Used ext4 for my root partition. When booting I keep getting error code 2 from grub, I even removed my 2nd harddisk, because I thought that was the problem. Is it possible that because I used the ftp install, that not all necessary packages are moved to core?

That is the only thing that I can think of causing this problem, or could it be a bug? Can't be, the overlord eats them like candy right ;)

Are there more people having problem with the ftp install and ext4?

To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an error booting the installed system?

Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 "The selected disk doesn't exist"

I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not grub-gfx, correct?

Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 system, so I am not sure about this.

Yes it's the new installed system, not the ISO. I first thought I my was my second hard disk and grub messing something up, but after removing that I got the same problem. I'm using the normal grub from core.

I'm going to try the core ISO to see if that works.

Can you try the exact same install with ext3 too? I want to know if this is a potential issue with our ext4 support.

Alexander De Sousa

2:56 a.m.

I've done several install in both physical and virtual machines since the first alpha. I've tried boot partitions in ext2, ext3 and ext4 (with different configurations) and never had a problem. Anyway, tomorrow morning (more or less at 9:30 AM UTC) I'll make another ftp install using ext4 for boot partitions in a virtual machine and a physical one. I'll beta2 ISOs unless another one is created by that time and reply whatever happens, sorry but I can't do it until then... :( Regards. On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 16:51 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
Hey,

I just tested 2009-01 beta 2 for x86_64. Used ext4 for my root partition. When booting I keep getting error code 2 from grub, I even removed my 2nd harddisk, because I thought that was the problem. Is it possible that because I used the ftp install, that not all necessary packages are moved to core?

That is the only thing that I can think of causing this problem, or could it be a bug? Can't be, the overlord eats them like candy right ;)

Are there more people having problem with the ftp install and ext4?

To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an error booting the installed system?

Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 "The selected disk doesn't exist"

I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not grub-gfx, correct?

Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 system, so I am not sure about this.

Yes it's the new installed system, not the ISO. I first thought I my was my second hard disk and grub messing something up, but after removing that I got the same problem. I'm using the normal grub from core.

I'm going to try the core ISO to see if that works.

Can you try the exact same install with ext3 too? I want to know if this is a potential issue with our ext4 support.

Jordy van Wolferen

3:14 a.m.

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 16:51 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
Hey,

I just tested 2009-01 beta 2 for x86_64. Used ext4 for my root partition. When booting I keep getting error code 2 from grub, I even removed my 2nd harddisk, because I thought that was the problem. Is it possible that because I used the ftp install, that not all necessary packages are moved to core?

That is the only thing that I can think of causing this problem, or could it be a bug? Can't be, the overlord eats them like candy right ;)

Are there more people having problem with the ftp install and ext4?

To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an error booting the installed system?

Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 "The selected disk doesn't exist"

I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not grub-gfx, correct?

Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 system, so I am not sure about this.

Yes it's the new installed system, not the ISO. I first thought I my was my second hard disk and grub messing something up, but after removing that I got the same problem. I'm using the normal grub from core.

I'm going to try the core ISO to see if that works.

Can you try the exact same install with ext3 too? I want to know if this is a potential issue with our ext4 support.

I just tried doing the same ftp install with ext3 and I still got the same error. Also the same error with a ext4 core install. So it must be something from my side. I tried to change the root setting in grub and the kernel root=/dev/sda1 parameter, instead of the UUID, but I still got the same problem.

Gerhard Brauer

3:28 p.m.

Am Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:14:11 +0100 schrieb Jordy van Wolferen :

...

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 16:51 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an error booting the installed system?

Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 "The selected disk doesn't exist"

I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not grub-gfx, correct?

Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 system, so I am not sure about this.

No, i have seen no problems on my test installations when using the current versions (grub from core and grub-gfx from community). Both are on the same patch-level (bigger inode size patch and ext4 support patch).

...

I just tried doing the same ftp install with ext3 and I still got the same error. Also the same error with a ext4 core install. So it must be something from my side.

Stage 1.5 (resp. Stage 2 error 2): Aaron posted a link on error codes where this error code is "Selected disk doesn't exist", on gnu.org grub site it says: "2 : Bad file or directory type". Have you ever had installed Arch and Grub on this system? So that you can say: this error is only on a new installation with the new isos?

...

I tried to change the root setting in grub and the kernel root=/dev/sda1 parameter, instead of the UUID, but I still got the same problem.

Maybe you could show us your disk(s) layout (fdisk -l) and grub's menu.lst (and the content of /boot/grub/device.map. Gerhard

Jordy van Wolferen

4:43 p.m.

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Gerhard Brauer wrote:

...

Am Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:14:11 +0100 schrieb Jordy van Wolferen :

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 16:51 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an error booting the installed system?

Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 "The selected disk doesn't exist"

I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not grub-gfx, correct?

Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 system, so I am not sure about this.

No, i have seen no problems on my test installations when using the current versions (grub from core and grub-gfx from community). Both are on the same patch-level (bigger inode size patch and ext4 support patch).

...
I just tried doing the same ftp install with ext3 and I still got the same error. Also the same error with a ext4 core install. So it must be something from my side.

Stage 1.5 (resp. Stage 2 error 2): Aaron posted a link on error codes where this error code is "Selected disk doesn't exist", on gnu.org grub site it says: "2 : Bad file or directory type". Have you ever had installed Arch and Grub on this system? So that you can say: this error is only on a new installation with the new isos?

...
I tried to change the root setting in grub and the kernel root=/dev/sda1 parameter, instead of the UUID, but I still got the same problem.

Maybe you could show us your disk(s) layout (fdisk -l) and grub's menu.lst (and the content of /boot/grub/device.map.

Gerhard

I installed Arch a couple of times on it before. I remember that I needed to change root (hd0,0) to (hd1,0) or the other way around. Or that it can't load the kernel, but than you can edit the grub entries or ofcourse remove the other harddisk. But now it doesn't work and I never have seen the grub error 2. Grub from Arch was running fine a few days ago. I tried disabling IDE in the bios after an installation, without success. I'm going to try to do that before the installation. It has something to do that I have both IDE and SATA . I found some info here: https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+question/7137 I'm going to try that. What just hit me, is that I flashed my bios about half a year ago, but after that it kept booting fine? Must be that now is the first time I tried installing grub with the new bios. I don't think there is something wrong with the new ISOs.

Alexander De Sousa

7:18 p.m.

Sorry for replying this late, but I couldn't access inet this morning. I've performed more fresh installs and all tests passed for an ext4 boot partition. Everything seems to be ok. On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Gerhard Brauer wrote:

...
Am Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:14:11 +0100 schrieb Jordy van Wolferen :

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 16:51 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an error booting the installed system?

Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 "The selected disk doesn't exist"

I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not grub-gfx, correct?

Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 system, so I am not sure about this.

No, i have seen no problems on my test installations when using the current versions (grub from core and grub-gfx from community). Both are on the same patch-level (bigger inode size patch and ext4 support patch).

...
I just tried doing the same ftp install with ext3 and I still got the same error. Also the same error with a ext4 core install. So it must be something from my side.

Stage 1.5 (resp. Stage 2 error 2): Aaron posted a link on error codes where this error code is "Selected disk doesn't exist", on gnu.org grub site it says: "2 : Bad file or directory type". Have you ever had installed Arch and Grub on this system? So that you can say: this error is only on a new installation with the new isos?

...
I tried to change the root setting in grub and the kernel root=/dev/sda1 parameter, instead of the UUID, but I still got the same problem.

Maybe you could show us your disk(s) layout (fdisk -l) and grub's menu.lst (and the content of /boot/grub/device.map.

Gerhard

I installed Arch a couple of times on it before. I remember that I needed to change root (hd0,0) to (hd1,0) or the other way around. Or that it can't load the kernel, but than you can edit the grub entries or ofcourse remove the other harddisk. But now it doesn't work and I never have seen the grub error 2. Grub from Arch was running fine a few days ago.

I tried disabling IDE in the bios after an installation, without success. I'm going to try to do that before the installation. It has something to do that I have both IDE and SATA .

I found some info here: https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+question/7137 I'm going to try that. What just hit me, is that I flashed my bios about half a year ago, but after that it kept booting fine? Must be that now is the first time I tried installing grub with the new bios. I don't think there is something wrong with the new ISOs.

Jordy van Wolferen

10:28 p.m.

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Alexander De Sousa wrote:

...

Sorry for replying this late, but I couldn't access inet this morning.

I've performed more fresh installs and all tests passed for an ext4 boot partition. Everything seems to be ok. On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Gerhard Brauer wrote:

...
Am Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:14:11 +0100 schrieb Jordy van Wolferen :

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 16:51 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote: > On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen > wrote: > > To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an error > booting the installed system? > > Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 > "The selected disk doesn't exist" > > I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not > grub-gfx, correct? > > Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 > system, so I am not sure about this.

No, i have seen no problems on my test installations when using the current versions (grub from core and grub-gfx from community). Both are on the same patch-level (bigger inode size patch and ext4 support patch).

...
I just tried doing the same ftp install with ext3 and I still got the same error. Also the same error with a ext4 core install. So it must be something from my side.

Stage 1.5 (resp. Stage 2 error 2): Aaron posted a link on error codes where this error code is "Selected disk doesn't exist", on gnu.org grub site it says: "2 : Bad file or directory type". Have you ever had installed Arch and Grub on this system? So that you can say: this error is only on a new installation with the new isos?

...
I tried to change the root setting in grub and the kernel root=/dev/sda1 parameter, instead of the UUID, but I still got the same problem.

Maybe you could show us your disk(s) layout (fdisk -l) and grub's menu.lst (and the content of /boot/grub/device.map.

Gerhard

I installed Arch a couple of times on it before. I remember that I needed to change root (hd0,0) to (hd1,0) or the other way around. Or that it can't load the kernel, but than you can edit the grub entries or ofcourse remove the other harddisk. But now it doesn't work and I never have seen the grub error 2. Grub from Arch was running fine a few days ago.

I tried disabling IDE in the bios after an installation, without success. I'm going to try to do that before the installation. It has something to do that I have both IDE and SATA .

I found some info here: https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+question/7137 I'm going to try that. What just hit me, is that I flashed my bios about half a year ago, but after that it kept booting fine? Must be that now is the first time I tried installing grub with the new bios. I don't think there is something wrong with the new ISOs.

I noticed today that my MBR doesn't get a fresh new grub install. I did a "dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb bs=512 count=1" and it stays empty, grub never kicks in. That maybe explain the grub 2 error. I also saw in the install cd that grub gave me an error message that it can't read the stage1 file. I tried installing grub manually but I got the same problem.

Aaron Griffin

10:42 p.m.

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Alexander De Sousa wrote:

...
Sorry for replying this late, but I couldn't access inet this morning.

I've performed more fresh installs and all tests passed for an ext4 boot partition. Everything seems to be ok. On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Gerhard Brauer wrote:

...
Am Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:14:11 +0100 schrieb Jordy van Wolferen :

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote: > On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 16:51 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen >> wrote: >> >> To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an error >> booting the installed system? >> >> Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 >> "The selected disk doesn't exist" >> >> I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not >> grub-gfx, correct? >> >> Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 >> system, so I am not sure about this.

No, i have seen no problems on my test installations when using the current versions (grub from core and grub-gfx from community). Both are on the same patch-level (bigger inode size patch and ext4 support patch).

...
I just tried doing the same ftp install with ext3 and I still got the same error. Also the same error with a ext4 core install. So it must be something from my side.

Stage 1.5 (resp. Stage 2 error 2): Aaron posted a link on error codes where this error code is "Selected disk doesn't exist", on gnu.org grub site it says: "2 : Bad file or directory type". Have you ever had installed Arch and Grub on this system? So that you can say: this error is only on a new installation with the new isos?

...
I tried to change the root setting in grub and the kernel root=/dev/sda1 parameter, instead of the UUID, but I still got the same problem.

Maybe you could show us your disk(s) layout (fdisk -l) and grub's menu.lst (and the content of /boot/grub/device.map.

Gerhard

I installed Arch a couple of times on it before. I remember that I needed to change root (hd0,0) to (hd1,0) or the other way around. Or that it can't load the kernel, but than you can edit the grub entries or ofcourse remove the other harddisk. But now it doesn't work and I never have seen the grub error 2. Grub from Arch was running fine a few days ago.

I tried disabling IDE in the bios after an installation, without success. I'm going to try to do that before the installation. It has something to do that I have both IDE and SATA .

I found some info here: https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+question/7137 I'm going to try that. What just hit me, is that I flashed my bios about half a year ago, but after that it kept booting fine? Must be that now is the first time I tried installing grub with the new bios. I don't think there is something wrong with the new ISOs.

I noticed today that my MBR doesn't get a fresh new grub install. I did a "dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb bs=512 count=1" and it stays empty, grub never kicks in. That maybe explain the grub 2 error. I also saw in the install cd that grub gave me an error message that it can't read the stage1 file. I tried installing grub manually but I got the same problem.

Weird. We used to use a different grub command in install the bootloader, but we changed it due to issues with ext4. It is possible that the original command was done in such a way because of failures like this. Here's the change: http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=installer.git;a=commitdiff;h=4565577dbd2182... Could you check if the old way works for you?

Jordy van Wolferen

11:30 p.m.

On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 13:42 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:

...

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Alexander De Sousa wrote:

...
Sorry for replying this late, but I couldn't access inet this morning.

I've performed more fresh installs and all tests passed for an ext4 boot partition. Everything seems to be ok. On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Gerhard Brauer wrote:

...
Am Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:14:11 +0100 schrieb Jordy van Wolferen :

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Jordy van Wolferen > wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 16:51 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen > >> > wrote: > >> > >> To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an error > >> booting the installed system? > >> > >> Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 > >> "The selected disk doesn't exist" > >> > >> I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not > >> grub-gfx, correct? > >> > >> Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 > >> system, so I am not sure about this.

No, i have seen no problems on my test installations when using the current versions (grub from core and grub-gfx from community). Both are on the same patch-level (bigger inode size patch and ext4 support patch).

...
I just tried doing the same ftp install with ext3 and I still got the same error. Also the same error with a ext4 core install. So it must be something from my side.

Stage 1.5 (resp. Stage 2 error 2): Aaron posted a link on error codes where this error code is "Selected disk doesn't exist", on gnu.org grub site it says: "2 : Bad file or directory type". Have you ever had installed Arch and Grub on this system? So that you can say: this error is only on a new installation with the new isos?

...
I tried to change the root setting in grub and the kernel root=/dev/sda1 parameter, instead of the UUID, but I still got the same problem.

Maybe you could show us your disk(s) layout (fdisk -l) and grub's menu.lst (and the content of /boot/grub/device.map.

Gerhard

I installed Arch a couple of times on it before. I remember that I needed to change root (hd0,0) to (hd1,0) or the other way around. Or that it can't load the kernel, but than you can edit the grub entries or ofcourse remove the other harddisk. But now it doesn't work and I never have seen the grub error 2. Grub from Arch was running fine a few days ago.

I tried disabling IDE in the bios after an installation, without success. I'm going to try to do that before the installation. It has something to do that I have both IDE and SATA .

I found some info here: https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+question/7137 I'm going to try that. What just hit me, is that I flashed my bios about half a year ago, but after that it kept booting fine? Must be that now is the first time I tried installing grub with the new bios. I don't think there is something wrong with the new ISOs.

I noticed today that my MBR doesn't get a fresh new grub install. I did a "dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb bs=512 count=1" and it stays empty, grub never kicks in. That maybe explain the grub 2 error. I also saw in the install cd that grub gave me an error message that it can't read the stage1 file. I tried installing grub manually but I got the same problem.

Weird. We used to use a different grub command in install the bootloader, but we changed it due to issues with ext4. It is possible that the original command was done in such a way because of failures like this.

Here's the change: http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=installer.git;a=commitdiff;h=4565577dbd2182...

Could you check if the old way works for you?

The old method works for me, now I can install grub! Only the bad thing is, I'm still getting error 2. I installed ubuntu for testing grub on the other IDE drive and I can bootup Arch from there. The grub from ubuntu is installed in /dev/sda. Now I got /dev/sda2 ubuntu (the rest on this disk is unformatted) /dev/sdb1 /boot (ext2) /dev/sdb2 swap /dev/sdb3 / (ext4) /dev/sdb4 /home (ext4) I installed grub (from Arch) on /dev/sdb and /dev/sdb1 (for booting from the ubuntu grub). Grub config I made in Ubuntu: root (hd1,0) kernel /vmlinuz26 root=/dev/sdb3 ro initrd /kernel26.img Thats the same as the Arch one (only with UUID). Now I'm really wondering where something is wrong..

Jordy van Wolferen

28 Jan 28 Jan

midnight

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 9:30 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Jordy van Wolferen wrote:

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Alexander De Sousa < aphanic@archlinux.us> wrote:

...
Sorry for replying this late, but I couldn't access inet this morning.

I've performed more fresh installs and all tests passed for an ext4

boot

...
partition. Everything seems to be ok. On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen < jordz@archlinux.us> wrote:

...
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Gerhard Brauer
...
...
...
wrote:

...
Am Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:14:11 +0100 schrieb Jordy van Wolferen :

> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Aaron Griffin > wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Jordy van Wolferen > > wrote: > > > On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 16:51 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote: > > >> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jordy van Wolferen > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> To be clear: this is not an error booting the ISO, but an

error

...
> > >> booting the installed system? > > >> > > >> Grub error #2: http://www.uruk.org/orig-grub/errors.html#stage1_5 > > >> "The selected disk doesn't exist" > > >> > > >> I imagine this is ext4 related. You are using grub and not > > >> grub-gfx, correct? > > >> > > >> Gerhard, any insight here? I, myself, haven't installed an ext4 > > >> system, so I am not sure about this.

No, i have seen no problems on my test installations when using the current versions (grub from core and grub-gfx from community). Both are on the same patch-level (bigger inode size patch and ext4 support patch).

> I just tried doing the same ftp install with ext3 and I still got

...
...
...
...
...
> same error. Also the same error with a ext4 core install. So it must > be something from my side.

Stage 1.5 (resp. Stage 2 error 2): Aaron posted a link on error codes where this error code is "Selected disk doesn't exist", on gnu.org grub site it says: "2 : Bad file or directory type". Have you ever had installed Arch and Grub on this system? So that you can say: this error is only on a new installation with the new isos?

> I tried to change the root setting in grub and the kernel > root=/dev/sda1 parameter, instead of the UUID, but I still got the > same problem.

Maybe you could show us your disk(s) layout (fdisk -l) and grub's menu.lst (and the content of /boot/grub/device.map.

Gerhard

I installed Arch a couple of times on it before. I remember that I needed to change root (hd0,0) to (hd1,0) or the other way around. Or that it can't load the kernel, but than you can edit the grub entries or ofcourse remove the other harddisk. But now it doesn't work and I never have seen the grub error 2. Grub from Arch was running fine a few days ago.

I tried disabling IDE in the bios after an installation, without success. I'm going to try to do that before the installation. It has something to do that I have both IDE and SATA .

I found some info here: https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+question/7137 I'm going to try that. What just hit me, is that I flashed my bios about half a year ago, but after that it kept booting fine? Must be that now is the first time I tried installing grub with the new bios. I don't

On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 13:42 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote: the think

...
...
...
...
there is something wrong with the new ISOs.

I noticed today that my MBR doesn't get a fresh new grub install. I did a "dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb bs=512 count=1" and it stays empty, grub never kicks in. That maybe explain the grub 2 error. I also saw in the install cd that grub gave me an error message that it can't read the stage1 file. I tried installing grub manually but I got the same problem.

Weird. We used to use a different grub command in install the bootloader, but we changed it due to issues with ext4. It is possible that the original command was done in such a way because of failures like this.

Here's the change:

http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=installer.git;a=commitdiff;h=4565577dbd2182...

...
Could you check if the old way works for you?

The old method works for me, now I can install grub! Only the bad thing is, I'm still getting error 2. I installed ubuntu for testing grub on the other IDE drive and I can bootup Arch from there. The grub from ubuntu is installed in /dev/sda.

Now I got /dev/sda2 ubuntu (the rest on this disk is unformatted)

/dev/sdb1 /boot (ext2) /dev/sdb2 swap /dev/sdb3 / (ext4) /dev/sdb4 /home (ext4)

I installed grub (from Arch) on /dev/sdb and /dev/sdb1 (for booting from the ubuntu grub).

Grub config I made in Ubuntu:

root (hd1,0) kernel /vmlinuz26 root=/dev/sdb3 ro initrd /kernel26.img

Thats the same as the Arch one (only with UUID). Now I'm really wondering where something is wrong..

Now I'm really confused. I booted Arch from the ubuntu grub, did a pacman -Syu (only a new kernel). Did a grub-install /dev/sdb, and I got a working grub on /dev/sdb. Changed root (hd1,0) to (hd0,0) and it Arch boots.

5572

Age (days ago)

5573

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

12 comments

4 participants

participants (4)

Aaron Griffin
Alexander De Sousa
Gerhard Brauer
Jordy van Wolferen