Monolithic kernel again

Monolithic kernel again

[Tony Gogoi]

Hello,

This question is about the monolithic kernel again. Hope I'm not bugging
the newsgroup. But I've tried many things and things still don't seem to
work.

My kernel is 2.4.20-8 from RedHat CD 9.0. I compiled the kernel without
module support. My lilo line as a root="nomodules /dev/hda9". Booting
seems to begin normally.

Booting stops saying QM_MODULES: function not implemented. I have read on
the net that that could be fixed with module-init-tools. But my question
is rather generic: All the problems I get are related to module support. I
have tried modifying the /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit to avoid modprobes etc
script etc but to no avail.

I would be grateful for some suggestions on how to make a monolithic
kernel completely independent of any module support.

Regards,
Tony

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[Matt Hemingway]

This is just my personal experience, but I build with no module support all the time and I've never put the root="nomodules /dev/hda9" in the lilo.conf file.  Have you tried it without the "nomodules" statement? 

Also, are your boot= default= and image= options set right (especially to the new kernel and not the previous one)?

-Matt

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:01:28 -0400 (EDT)
Tony Gogoi <tgogoi@cse.Buffalo.EDU> wrote:

> 
> Hello,
> 
> This question is about the monolithic kernel again. Hope I'm not bugging
> the newsgroup. But I've tried many things and things still don't seem to
> work.
> 
> My kernel is 2.4.20-8 from RedHat CD 9.0. I compiled the kernel without
> module support. My lilo line as a root="nomodules /dev/hda9". Booting
> seems to begin normally.
> 
> Booting stops saying QM_MODULES: function not implemented. I have read on
> the net that that could be fixed with module-init-tools. But my question
> is rather generic: All the problems I get are related to module support. I
> have tried modifying the /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit to avoid modprobes etc
> script etc but to no avail.
> 
> I would be grateful for some suggestions on how to make a monolithic
> kernel completely independent of any module support.
> 
> Regards,
> Tony
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[Tony Gogoi]

Hi matt,

Yes, I tried first without "nomodules", exactly the same thing happens.

I don't have an "image=" line. I have "initrd" lines in lilo.conf created
by "make install". Do you use"make install" ?

The default option points to the working default modular kernel.

> This is just my personal experience, but I build with no module support
> all the time and I've never put the root="nomodules /dev/hda9" in the
> lilo.conf file.  Have you tried it without the "nomodules" statement?
>
> Also, are your boot= default= and image= options set right (especially
> to the new kernel and not the previous one)?
>
> -Matt
>
> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:01:28 -0400 (EDT)
> Tony Gogoi <tgogoi@cse.Buffalo.EDU> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > This question is about the monolithic kernel again. Hope I'm not bugging
> > the newsgroup. But I've tried many things and things still don't seem to
> > work.
> >
> > My kernel is 2.4.20-8 from RedHat CD 9.0. I compiled the kernel without
> > module support. My lilo line as a root="nomodules /dev/hda9". Booting
> > seems to begin normally.
> >
> > Booting stops saying QM_MODULES: function not implemented. I have read on
> > the net that that could be fixed with module-init-tools. But my question
> > is rather generic: All the problems I get are related to module support. I
> > have tried modifying the /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit to avoid modprobes etc
> > script etc but to no avail.
> >
> > I would be grateful for some suggestions on how to make a monolithic
> > kernel completely independent of any module support.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tony
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>



Tony Gogoi

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[Matt Hemingway]

hmm.

I haven't used RH in years, so I'm not sure what the initrd lines are about.  Also, what are you doing a "make install" on?  

I build my 2.4.x kernel's via make mrproper (if it's new), make (menu)config, make dep && make bzImage all in the top level kernel source. Then cp arch/i386/boot/bzImage over my current kernel (for me it's /boot/vmlinuz).  Well, first I backup the current one to /boot/vmlinuz.old, then overwrite.  Then I update /etc/lilo.conf accordingly.

My lilo.conf file is something like this (yours will be a bit diff. of course):

boot=/dev/hda
root=/dev/hda2
default=Linux-2.4.20
image=/boot/vmlinuz
        label=Linux-2.4.20
	read-only
image=/boot/vmlinuz.old
        label=Linux-2.4.19
	read-only

Then I run lilo and get a nice pat on the back...usually.

-Matt

 
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:28:40 -0400 (EDT)
Tony Gogoi <tgogoi@cse.Buffalo.EDU> wrote:

> 
> Hi matt,
> 
> Yes, I tried first without "nomodules", exactly the same thing happens.
> 
> I don't have an "image=" line. I have "initrd" lines in lilo.conf created
> by "make install". Do you use"make install" ?
> 
> The default option points to the working default modular kernel.
> 
> > This is just my personal experience, but I build with no module support
> > all the time and I've never put the root="nomodules /dev/hda9" in the
> > lilo.conf file.  Have you tried it without the "nomodules" statement?
> >
> > Also, are your boot= default= and image= options set right (especially
> > to the new kernel and not the previous one)?
> >
> > -Matt
> >
> > On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:01:28 -0400 (EDT)
> > Tony Gogoi <tgogoi@cse.Buffalo.EDU> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > This question is about the monolithic kernel again. Hope I'm not bugging
> > > the newsgroup. But I've tried many things and things still don't seem to
> > > work.
> > >
> > > My kernel is 2.4.20-8 from RedHat CD 9.0. I compiled the kernel without
> > > module support. My lilo line as a root="nomodules /dev/hda9". Booting
> > > seems to begin normally.
> > >
> > > Booting stops saying QM_MODULES: function not implemented. I have read on
> > > the net that that could be fixed with module-init-tools. But my question
> > > is rather generic: All the problems I get are related to module support. I
> > > have tried modifying the /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit to avoid modprobes etc
> > > script etc but to no avail.
> > >
> > > I would be grateful for some suggestions on how to make a monolithic
> > > kernel completely independent of any module support.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Tony
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
> 
> 
> 
> Tony Gogoi
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[terry white]

... ciao:

:	on "9-10-2004" "Matt Hemingway" writ:

: I build my 2.4.x kernel's via make mrproper (if it's new), make
: (menu)config, make dep && make bzImage all in the top level kernel
: source. Then cp arch/i386/boot/bzImage over my current kernel (for me
: it's /boot/vmlinuz).  Well, first I backup the current one to
: /boot/vmlinuz.old, then overwrite.  Then I update /etc/lilo.conf
: accordingly.

    in addition , "System.map" from the 'root' of the source, needs to
find its way to /boot ...


-- 
... i'm a man, but i can change,
    if i have to , i guess ...

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[Tony Gogoi]

Hello,

I tried what u guys suggested.

Instead of using "make install" script to do all the new kernel
installation, I copied ~mydir/arc/i386/boot/bzimage /boot/vmlinuz, copied
~mydir/System.map to /boot (or made a soft link to /boot/System.map).

When I boot however, it goes upto "initalizing swap space [OK] and then
then says: Can't open dependencies file /lib/modules/mykernel-version.....

But why does a monolithic kernel try to "open" a "modules" related file? I
guess I need to play around with the /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit and remove the
lines related to "probing"... I did try a bit of that too earlier but only
made things worse.

I never had these problems with compiling modular kernels.

regards,
tony


n Fri, 10 Sep 2004, terry white wrote:

> ... ciao:
>
> :	on "9-10-2004" "Matt Hemingway" writ:
>
> : I build my 2.4.x kernel's via make mrproper (if it's new), make
> : (menu)config, make dep && make bzImage all in the top level kernel
> : source. Then cp arch/i386/boot/bzImage over my current kernel (for me
> : it's /boot/vmlinuz).  Well, first I backup the current one to
> : /boot/vmlinuz.old, then overwrite.  Then I update /etc/lilo.conf
> : accordingly.
>
>     in addition , "System.map" from the 'root' of the source, needs to
> find its way to /boot ...
>
>
> --
> ... i'm a man, but i can change,
>     if i have to , i guess ...
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>



Tony Gogoi

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[joy]

Tony Gogoi wrote:

>Hello,
>
>I tried what u guys suggested.
>
>Instead of using "make install" script to do all the new kernel
>installation, I copied ~mydir/arc/i386/boot/bzimage /boot/vmlinuz, copied
>~mydir/System.map to /boot (or made a soft link to /boot/System.map).
>
>When I boot however, it goes upto "initalizing swap space [OK] and then
>then says: Can't open dependencies file /lib/modules/mykernel-version.....
>
>  
>
why don't you just do a make modules_install ?  maybe it just needs the 
presence of such a file
regardless of wether your kernel is modular or not.... atleast, if 
nothing else , to ensure that there are no module
dependencies.....

>But why does a monolithic kernel try to "open" a "modules" related file? I
>guess I need to play around with the /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit and remove the
>lines related to "probing"... I did try a bit of that too earlier but only
>made things worse.
>
>I never had these problems with compiling modular kernels.
>
>regards,
>  
>
Joy.M.Monteiro

>tony
>  
>
>  
>

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[terry white]

on "9-11-2004" "joy" writ:

: why don't you just do a make modules_install ?

    that will fail ...


-- 
... i'm a man, but i can change,
    if i have to , i guess ...

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[Adrian C.]

normal compilation
make modules (even if you don't have any) && make modules_install

mine is working.

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 13:44:01 -0700 (PDT), terry white <twhite@aniota.com> wrote:
> on "9-11-2004" "joy" writ:
> 
> : why don't you just do a make modules_install ?
> 
>     that will fail ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> ... i'm a man, but i can change,
>     if i have to , i guess ...
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>

Re: Monolithic kernel again : Fixed :-)

[Tony Gogoi]

Just needed to change my "append" line in lilo.conf from
append="root=/dev/hda8"
to
append="root=/dev/hda8 nomodules nousb nofirewire"

Looks as if probing for USB during boot was the earlier problem.

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004, Adrian C. wrote:

> normal compilation
> make modules (even if you don't have any) && make modules_install
>
> mine is working.
>
> On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 13:44:01 -0700 (PDT), terry white <twhite@aniota.com> wrote:
> > on "9-11-2004" "joy" writ:
> >
> > : why don't you just do a make modules_install ?
> >
> >     that will fail ...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ... i'm a man, but i can change,
> >     if i have to , i guess ...
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>



Tony Gogoi

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[terry white]

... ciao:

:	on "9-11-2004" "Adrian C." writ:
: normal compilation
: make modules (even if you don't have any) && make modules_install
:
: mine is working.

    oh 'really'.

    here , "make modules" offers:

	"The present kernel configuration has modules disabled.
	 Type 'make config' and enable loadable module support.
	 Then build a kernel with module support enabled.

	 make: *** [modules] Error 1"

    this same message from 2.2.x and 2.4.x kernels from 'kernel.org' on
RH boxes ...





-- 
... i'm a man, but i can change,
    if i have to , i guess ...

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[Tony Gogoi]

> why don't you just do a make modules_install ?  maybe it just needs the
> presence of such a file
> regardless of wether your kernel is modular or not.... atleast, if
> nothing else , to ensure that there are no module
> dependencies.....
>
A modular kernel may be a little more unstable then a monolithic kernel
I've heard. I feel it would be better to have a monolithic kernel for a
server. At least there won't be any probing for a non-existent device +
race conditions.

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[Andrew Kelly]

On Sun, 2004-09-12 at 01:36, Tony Gogoi wrote:
> > why don't you just do a make modules_install ?  maybe it just needs the
> > presence of such a file
> > regardless of wether your kernel is modular or not.... atleast, if
> > nothing else , to ensure that there are no module
> > dependencies.....
> >
> A modular kernel may be a little more unstable then a monolithic kernel
> I've heard. I feel it would be better to have a monolithic kernel for a
> server. At least there won't be any probing for a non-existent device +
> race conditions.

Another good reason (my primary reason, actually) for putting a
monolithic kernel in a server is for security's sake. 
Not being able to load modules narrows the threat vector a bit.

Andy

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[terry white]

... ciao:

:	on "9-10-2004" "Tony Gogoi" writ:

: This question is about the monolithic kernel again.  [ modules ]

    i think, ultimately you'll find a script is checking for modules ...


-- 
... i'm a man, but i can change,
    if i have to , i guess ...

Re: Monolithic kernel again

[terry white]

... ciao:

:	on "9-11-2004" "Adrian C." writ:
: normal compilation
: make modules (even if you don't have any) && make modules_install
:
: mine is working.

    oh 'really'.

    here , "make modules" offers:

	"The present kernel configuration has modules disabled.
	 Type 'make config' and enable loadable module support.
	 Then build a kernel with module support enabled.

	 make: *** [modules] Error 1"

    this same message from 2.2.x and 2.4.x kernels from 'kernel.org' on
RH boxes ...


-- 
... i'm a man, but i can change,
    if i have to , i guess ...

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html