kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

xirus · 2007-10-23 11:41:20

After upgrading to kernel 2.6.23, my system doesn't want to boot anymore, just after initrd (so in the very begin of the boot stage) it sais "No setup signature found"
Searching google for it, it seems that this was a problem with the rc-1, which should have been fixed

Anyone else having the same problem? When I downgraded to 2.6.22, it worked again. I guess it's a kernel bug.

I use the latest grub

ru · 2007-11-07 23:15:33

After upgrading to 2.6.23, my system also failed to boot, complaining "No setup signature found".

I cannot get into my Arch install. I have an Ubuntu 6.06 install (from which I am publishing this message) but the following did not work:

mount --bind /proc /arch/proc
mount --bind /sys /arch/sys
chroot /arch /bin/bash

I get, "FATAL: kernel too old".

I kept around the old kernel pkg.tar.gz for kernel version 2.6.22, and I took the files boot/vmlinuz26 and boot/System.map26 from that package and booted with them, but that left me lost for ideas how to proceed in a minimalistic shell in a small ramfs without even a ls command, with the kernel compaining that it cannot create device file /dev/hdc6 (my Arch root partition). I tried to build a boot/kernel26.img (ram fs) from the raw ingredients in the 2.6.22 pkg.tar.gz but like I said the only install I can boot into is a 18-month-old Ubuntu install and the necessary tools for building the ram fs do not exists and it looked like a hairy ordeal to install them. Nor will the old Ubuntu vmlinuz-2.6.15 boot my up-to-date Arch root partition: it cannot mount the ext3 file system.

What I would really like is for some kind person to make a new package called something like kernel26-2.6.23.1-7-i686.pkg.tar.gz that does not have the "no setup signature found" problem and put it where I can get it, for example, ftp.archlinux.org/core/os/i686. But IIUC that would help me only if I can use the boot/vmlinuz26 and boot/System.map26 files from that package with the boot/kernel26.img file already on my Arch install because like I said, it is too hard for me to build a boot/kernel26.img with the old tools I have.

I would gladly pay $10 to the person who makes a suggestion that helps me to boot back into my Arch install. I can paypal the $10 or whatever.

P.S. what proactive measures can I take to make it easier to recover from a similar situation in future? If I had copied my (4 gig) Arch root partition before embarking on the system upgrade, I would probably have been able to solve the problem without asking online for help. Is a duplicate Arch root partition the best protection from things like this?

After I get back into my Arch install, I still have to fix X! (Everything was working fine till I did a long-delayed pacman -Syu.)

Last edited by ru (2007-11-09 07:29:43)

ru · 2007-11-09 07:06:39

I am still unable to boot. I just noticed that the unstable repository has a 2.6.23 kernel package. I have downloaded that and am now going to try to boot the kernel and System.map from that package in combination with the various initial ram disks in my boot partition. I am unable to read my mail very well without my Arch world, so if you want to send me mail instead of using the mailto: link under my name please send mail to notprivate2@gmail.com. Please send me an email or reply to this message even if you do not have any suggestion because I want to get a sense whether people are reading this.

ganja_guru · 2007-11-09 09:05:58

do you have a separate /boot partition, or is /boot a part of your root partition itself?

this page has something similar to your problem, although its for SUSE Linux Enterprise Server

http://www.novell.com/support/dynamickc … Id=3864925

ru: Are you able to chroot into your system using an arch install cd? maybe you can use pacman to install the old kernel?

ru · 2007-11-09 09:52:15

Yes, my /boot is separate. I will look at your URL now.

My Arch install cd is years old and it is a nightmare to get it to boot a modern Arch root partition. For example, it will be confused by the /dev/hdc6 etc in my /etc/fstab: it wants to see /dev/discs/disc0/lalala. Moreover, it probably will not work at all because the 2.6.15 kernel that I use to boot my old Ubuntu root partition refuses to boot my modern Arch root partition (complaining, "FATAL: kernel too old") nor like I said can I chroot in from Ubuntu. (in fact I get the exact same error message, "FATAL: kernel too old".)

A fresh Arch install CD is speeding its way to me by priority mail though.

Last edited by ru (2007-11-09 09:59:22)

waldek_a · 2007-11-09 12:56:57

if you need cpio image for kernel kernel26-2.6.22.9-1-i686.pkg.tar.gz, I put it here:

http://www.snwbrd.info/temp/kernel26-fallback.img

good luck.

ru · 2007-11-10 16:14:29

OK, I have booted into my Arch using the cpio image made by Waldek A.

Thanks, Waldek! I will pay you $10 like I said I would.

X still does not work, complaining,

"X: error while loading shared libraries: libgcc_s.so.1"

The obvious thing to try would be to downgrade the X packages that were upgraded in the pacman -Syu. I have about 80 packages to downgrade to get to where I was before the pacman -Syu. I might not bother. I need a distro where updating (like pacman -Syu) does not generate the need for me to fix a lot of things and to go without my familiar software for 4 or 5 days.

ganja_guru · 2007-11-10 18:01:59

is gcc-libs installed?

waldek_a · 2007-11-11 21:50:46

@ru, you don't have to pay me :-) I'm glad I could help.

ru · 2007-11-12 14:55:26

Walldek, I expected that you wouild say that. Viele Danke.

Ganja, they were installed, but I was able to get X to start up by pacman -Rd gcc-libs; pacman -S gcc-libs.

Many other things are wrong however. The URL you gave me says that the "No setup signature found" kernel panic is a sign that the kernel image is corrupted. I saw other signs that my executables are corrupted. The fact that re-installing gcc-libs fixed gcc-libs is one of those others signs. This caused me to conduct a test of my RAM. The RAM passed all tests. So now I suspect that one of my hard drives, the one with my Arch install on it, is failing. My Ubuntu install is on the other hard drive, and it works normally. This hard drive that I suspect is corrupted has been powered on almost continuously since 1999.

Does anyone know what is the most reliable hard drive for a person who does not turn his computer off at night?

It would have taken me longer to diagnose the problem without this web page and without Waldek and Ganja Guru. In fact, I did not begin to suspect my hard drive until after I started to write this message. (Before that my best guess was that the Arch developers had done a sloppy job in packaging!)

ravster · 2007-11-13 00:16:05

I don't think this could be a hardware error since the computer works perfectly whenever I use the 2.6.22 kernel. This only happens with 2.6.23. I don't know how to help with solving the problem apart from saying that there is one.
If anyone knows how to collect more data so that devs can solve this problem, please let us know.
Thanks.

ru · 2007-11-13 17:47:28

I am not disputing that the 2.6.23 kernel package has bugs. (I wouldn't know.)

I am experiencing massive bugginess (random restart of X as if C-A-Backspace was pressed when I was not typing or mousing; the appearance of the "you hit a Sticky Key five times in a row" dialog box when I was not typing anything) after I downgraded to 2.6.22. Then I switched to my Ubuntu 6.06 install and it has worked normally for dozens of hours, which rules out hardware problems except possible for the hard drive my Arch install is on. (My Ubuntu 6.06 install is on the other hard drive.)

In short: two different problems are being described in this page: ravster's and mine.

ganja_guru · 2007-11-14 14:25:38

ru: since a reinstall of gcc-libs helped, lets try to work with the core system files first. So do a:

pacman -S pacman
#to make sure nothing about pacman is messed up

pacman -S base base-devel

you will be asked if you want to force install, so just enter 'y'

let us know how it goes..good luck!

ru · 2007-11-14 22:15:41

Thanks for the suggestion. I just received a nice shiny 2007.08-2 install CD and was thinking of reinstalling Arch (probably on a new hard drive). I have yet to run the S.M.A.R.T. diagnostics on my existing hard drive.

ravster · 2007-11-22 12:44:07

My problem got solved once I updated my GRUB to version 0.97.
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8680
Xirus, have you tried, perhaps, re-installing grub?

TheSaint · 2007-11-23 10:35:39

I'm going to do the upgrade too. I'm afraid If it won't start I don't have anything to start from, in order to fix the problem.
I've a separate partition (/boot) therefore should I upgrade grub first?
Here's the menu.lst

title ArchLinux
root (hd0,4)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz26 quiet root=/dev/hda5 ro vga=791 splash=silent,theme:darch
initrd /boot/kernel26.img

Obvious /dev/hda5 is where I've Arch set up.

F

ravster · 2007-11-23 19:14:08

It never hurt to upgrade grub first.
Just follow the directions for upgrading grub on the wiki.

byte · 2007-11-24 12:19:50

TheSaint:

> kernel /boot/vmlinuz26 quiet root=/dev/hda5 ro vga=791 splash=silent,theme:darch

hda? Are you sure? You better have the ide HOOK in /etc/mkinitcpio.conf (and no sata/pata/scsi), because the default libata subsystem (since 2.6.19, iirc) only uses the SCSI naming sda.

And according to your menu.lst you have no seperate /boot partition, else you wouldn't use those paths with /boot in them.

Last edited by byte (2007-11-24 12:21:20)

TheSaint · 2007-11-24 13:01:13

byte wrote:

TheSaint:
hda? Are you sure? You better have the ide HOOK in /etc/mkinitcpio.conf (and no sata/pata/scsi), because the default libata subsystem (since 2.6.19, iirc) only uses the SCSI naming sda.

I'm using the kernel 2.6.22 and udev accordingly, but no problem as you pointing out. In /dev there're all the partitions as hdaX (where X stands from 1 to 8).

byte wrote:

And according to your menu.lst you have no seperate /boot partition, else you wouldn't use those paths with /boot in them.

This menu.lst reside into /dev/hda1 and its own grub. Then the boot will look in this boot sector and load the remaining phase as per grub 0.91.
I've a little doubt how to update the grub in this partition, afterward may not have any further problem for the kernel itself. Unless the new udev will change the way to name the partitions.

F

TheSaint · 2007-11-24 13:03:38

ravster wrote:

It never hurt to upgrade grub first.
Just follow the directions for upgrading grub on the wiki.

Done, but surely it's gone into /dev/hda5/boot. If I want to update /dev/hda1/boot, which will be the command?

F

byte · 2007-11-24 13:11:42

Didn't I tell you?

Paste the following:
- fdisk -l
- grep ^[A-Z] /etc/mkinitcpio.conf
- the relevant parts of (both!) menu.lst
- /etc/fstab

TheSaint · 2007-11-24 13:26:47

Here it goes:

root-laptop> fdisk -l

Disco /dev/hda: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 byte

255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders
Units = cilindri of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x24da24d9

Dispositivo Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hda1 1 6 48163+ 83 Linux
/dev/hda2 * 7 1033 8249346 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/hda3 1034 2102 8586742+ 17 HPFS/NTFS nascosto
/dev/hda4 2103 9729 61263877+ f W95 Esteso (LBA)
/dev/hda5 2103 2744 5156833+ 83 Linux
/dev/hda6 2745 2872 1028128+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris
/dev/hda7 2873 5304 19535008+ b W95 FAT32
/dev/hda8 5305 9729 35543781 83 Linux
root-laptop> grep ^[A-Z] /etc/mkinitcpio.conf
MODULES=""
BINARIES=""
FILES=""
HOOKS="base udev autodetect ide scsi fbsplash filesystems"
FBTHEMES="darch"
FBRES="1024x768"
root-laptop> cat /etc/fstab
#
# /etc/fstab: static file system information
#
# <file system> <dir> <type> <options> <dump> <pass>
none /dev/pts devpts defaults 0 0
/tmp /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0 #modifica /25/4/06

/dev/cdrom /mnt/cd iso9660 ro,user,noauto,unhide 0 0
/dev/dvd /mnt/dvd udf ro,user,noauto,unhide 0 0
/dev/fd0 /mnt/fl vfat user,noauto 0 0

/dev/hda2 /mnt/win/XP_he ntfs ro,user,umask=000
/dev/hda3 /mnt/win/XP_pro ntfs ro,user,umask=000
/dev/hda7 /mnt/win/Data vfat rw,user,umask=000
/dev/hda6 swap swap defaults 0 0
/dev/hda5 / ext3 defaults 0 1
/dev/hda8 /home ext3 defaults 0 1

./dev/hda1/boot/grub/menu.lst

title ArchLinux
root (hd0,4)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz26 quiet root=/dev/hda5 ro vga=791 splash=silent,theme:darch
initrd /boot/kernel26.img

./boot/grub/menu.lst
title Arch Linux [/boot/vmlinuz]
root (hd0,0)
kernel /vmlinuz26 root=/dev/hda3 ro
initrd /initrd26.img

The last is what grub autodetect and try to set, supposing that I'm not using another partition to boot.

The old story rely on some year ago which I got 2 linux partitions and I've tried to unify the boot in a separate partition.

F

byte · 2007-11-24 13:52:18

Okay, that's really messed up.

I'll assume that everything works fine so far with the grub and boot/ on hda1 now, especially the splash and booting XP. Make sure that's really the active grub by hitting 'e' on the grub boot screen and verify the paths.
Now make a fstab entry for that partition (/dev/hda1 /boot ext2 defaults ...whatever), move your current /boot on hda5 out of the way (rename it), mkdir /boot, mount /boot, and finally pacman -S kernel26 grub
If that went okay, edit the menu.lst to strip the boot/ from the paths and change the root line to (hd0,0), then run grub-install /dev/hda and reboot, hopefully for the last time.

I might have forgot something so it's always wise to keep an Arch live/install-cd nearby.

TheSaint · 2007-11-25 01:55:15

byte wrote:

Now make a fstab entry for that partition (/dev/hda1 /boot ext2 defaults ...whatever), move your current /boot on hda5 out of the way (rename it), mkdir /boot, mount /boot

I knew about mounting /boot into that partition, but this is an old story, since I was expecting to using 2 distro and then both don't have to modify the boot, but simply I was correcting the entry once the kernel/grub updates.
Now I've definitely turn into Arch and the second Linux distro has been removed, but I reserve the chance to boot out of the box, by a portable HD. In fact my PC doesn't boot on USB and then it needs a floppy or the first partition to let me choose if I want boot the portable HD (till now unsuccessfully )

byte wrote:

might have forgot something so it's always wise to keep an Arch live/install-cd nearby.

I'm on the move and I didn't carry many things with me. I'm gonna arrange some download and burn the CD for that extreme occasion.

After have prepared some tool in the bad case, I got no problem instead

I could boot with the same grub, but new kernel. I like to go the way to try Arch out-of-the-box.

F

Last edited by TheSaint (2007-11-25 12:20:07)

ru · 2007-11-27 17:47:45

Got my Arch install sorted out. (It wasn't data corruption.)

Arch Linux

#1 2007-10-23 11:41:20

kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#2 2007-11-07 23:15:33

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#3 2007-11-09 07:06:39

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#4 2007-11-09 09:05:58

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#5 2007-11-09 09:52:15

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#6 2007-11-09 12:56:57

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#7 2007-11-10 16:14:29

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#8 2007-11-10 18:01:59

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#9 2007-11-11 21:50:46

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#10 2007-11-12 14:55:26

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#11 2007-11-13 00:16:05

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#12 2007-11-13 17:47:28

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#13 2007-11-14 14:25:38

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#14 2007-11-14 22:15:41

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#15 2007-11-22 12:44:07

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#16 2007-11-23 10:35:39

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#17 2007-11-23 19:14:08

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#18 2007-11-24 12:19:50

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#19 2007-11-24 13:01:13

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#20 2007-11-24 13:03:38

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#21 2007-11-24 13:11:42

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#22 2007-11-24 13:26:47

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#23 2007-11-24 13:52:18

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#24 2007-11-25 01:55:15

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

#25 2007-11-27 17:47:45

Re: kernel 2.6.23 doesn't boot: no setup signature found

Board footer