Arch Linux

NoOneImportant

Member

From: Deep Southern California

Registered: 2007-02-13

Posts: 178

2.6.19 and 2.6.20

I have been getting the the following error all day.

VFS: Cannot open root device "xxx" or unknown block (0,0)
Please append a correct "root=" boot option
Kernel panic -not syncing: VFS: unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(0,0)

With pre 2.6.19 kernels I would usually assign the boot option root sdb2 making "root=/dev/sdb2"

This is with both 2.6.19 and 2.6.20 kernels. (2.6.19 being the one provided through pacman and 2.6.20 being custom)

I have tried everything like "earlymodules=piix", using "root=/dev/hdb2/", using "root=/dev/by-label/ARCH" (I did assign it a label), and break=y and nothing works. (Adding break=y to the Kernel line with grub does not do anything at all.)

Sata support is enabled in the 2.6.20 kernel (I made sure of it).

Does anyone have a solution

phrakture

Arch Overlord

From: behind you

Registered: 2003-10-29

Posts: 7,879

Website

Re: 2.6.19 and 2.6.20

a) Does it actually say "xxx" in the error?
b) root=/dev/hdb2/ doesn't work, remove the trailing slash - it is a device, not a directory
c) If break=y in the grub menu does nothing then you're either not using the mkinitcpio based kernel, or not booting with the changes you made.

Do you see and ":: blah blah" messages - the ones that begin with two colons are from the mkinitcpio scripts.  If they are not there, you're not using the mkinitcpio kernel.

---

http://phraktured.net

NoOneImportant

Member

From: Deep Southern California

Registered: 2007-02-13

Posts: 178

Re: 2.6.19 and 2.6.20

Thanks.

I will be doing a reinstallation tomorrow morning because I think I screwed everything up.

Here's another question.

If I do a system update, which will install a kernel update, should I generate a new image using mkinitcpio?

Better yet, should I just generate a new image upon doing a successful boot without the update?

iBertus

Member

From: Greenville, NC

Registered: 2004-11-04

Posts: 2,228

Re: 2.6.19 and 2.6.20

Thanks.

I will be doing a reinstallation tomorrow morning because I think I screwed everything up.

Here's another question.

If I do a system update, which will install a kernel update, should I generate a new image using mkinitcpio?

Better yet, should I just generate a new image upon doing a successful boot without the update?

1. No, the install script for the kernel package will take care of building a new image.
2. I really don't see any point in doing this either. It is true that there are times the image requires rebuilding (as stated above) but if you install with the newest iso you'll already have a working image upon boot.

Have you tried 0.8-beta iso?

NoOneImportant

Member

From: Deep Southern California

Registered: 2007-02-13

Posts: 178

Re: 2.6.19 and 2.6.20

Have you tried 0.8-beta iso?

No. Where can I find it?

Snowman

Developer/Forum Fellow

From: Montreal, Canada

Registered: 2004-08-20

Posts: 5,212

Re: 2.6.19 and 2.6.20

Have you tried 0.8-beta iso?

No. Where can I find it?

Here: http://www.archlinux.org/news/283/
It'll probably  solve your problems.

lucke

Member

From: Poland

Registered: 2004-11-30

Posts: 4,018

Re: 2.6.19 and 2.6.20

Try booting with kernel26-fallback.img initrd image.

NoOneImportant

Member

From: Deep Southern California

Registered: 2007-02-13

Posts: 178

Re: 2.6.19 and 2.6.20

Problem fixed. I think it was just a renaming issue of the initrd and the kernel image.

I guess I will install video drivers and a desktop now.