LILO Error 09

LILO Error 09

[Carles Pina i Estany]

Hello,

I have two computers using RAID 1, with only one problem.

I am using hda and hdc, ReiserFS, Kernel 2.6.14.

I installed LILO on both hard disks, so I can disconnect primary master
and then BIOS tries to boot using hdc and it works fine.

When I was installing it I made some tests, and one time (with working
configuration) I just restarted and LILO wrote 09 09 09 09 09 (lot of
times, something like half screen). Then I restarted again and it worked
fine, and I had no more time to check it.

Today, after power failure and shutdown (UPC) system was not starting,
with this same problem.

In Manual.txt of Lilo I can read:
   
   0x09   "DMA attempt across 64k boundary". This shouldn't happen, but may 
       inicate a disk geometry mis-match. Try omitting the COMPACT option. You 
       may need to specify the disk geometry yourself.  

I never had this problem, and usually I works on Lilo. So I think
that maybe I have something in Lilo + RAID that is not fine. I don't
have "compact" option in LILO, and Lilo has not said to me any warning when
I installed it.

Any idea?

Thank you very much,

-- 
Carles Pina i Estany		GPG id: 0x8CBDAE64
	http://pinux.info	Manresa - Barcelona

Re: LILO Error 09

[Carles Pina i Estany]

Hello again,

On Dec/16/2005, Carles Pina i Estany wrote:

I add some information. I have not used raid-extra-boot because in other
computer I had some problems with this option. Maybe I should try...
when I will be near to computer :-)

And my Lilo version:
LILO version 22.6.1 (Debian GNU/Linux)

And I repeat: sometimes appears 09 09 09 error and sometimes doesn't
appear, always with both hard disks without failure. Last time I pressed
"pause" before LILO (after two times without properly boot). Then booted
fine, and I have had no more time... 

Thank you very much,

-- 
Carles Pina i Estany		GPG id: 0x8CBDAE64
	http://pinux.info	Manresa - Barcelona

Re: LILO Error 09

[Carles Pina i Estany]

Hello again again,

On Dec/16/2005, Carles Pina i Estany wrote:

It has been my blame, it is error 99 99 99 (it happened again :-|   )

I have found information about error 99 99 99 in Internet, so I think
that I will be able to improve/fix :-)

Sorry to expend your times...

-- 
Carles Pina i Estany		GPG id: 0x8CBDAE64
	http://pinux.info	Manresa - Barcelona