File-based locking initialisation failed

noahsark1126 · 2010-02-03 21:17:30

After the recent libpng/libjpeg upgrade (in which my kernel, xserver, lvm2, and a number of other things were also upgraded), I get the following message every time Arch boots

:: Activating LVM2 Groups
  File-based locking initialisation failed

It happens on my desktop and laptop, which both run Arch but on entirely different hardware (both of course have lvm groups).

I can't find anything at all about it online. It doesn't appear to be related to any actual problem, so should I even worry about it or just ignore it?

noahsark1126 · 2010-02-04 17:18:56

Also, the output of fdisk -l includes

Disk /dev/dm-0: 24.7 GB, 24696061952 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 3002 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/dm-0 doesn't contain a valid partition table

Disk /dev/dm-1: 187.9 GB, 187904819200 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 22844 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/dm-1 doesn't contain a valid partition table

Disk /dev/dm-2: 504.2 GB, 504197283840 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 61298 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/dm-2 doesn't contain a valid partition table

Those are my 3 logical volumes. I have identical behavior on both machines.

Is this an actual problem or should I just ignore it?

lynix · 2010-02-05 09:50:22

Same here, along with some other problems. I think we should not ignore those messages
I'll let you know if I find a solution.

orschiro · 2010-02-05 10:05:45

Here on my laptop occurs exactly the same message during boot.

By the way, which file is responsible for logging the startup? The pause-button isn't working at boot and I'd like to check for more errors.

And @ lynix,

awesome to meet another person from Karlsruhe here.

Can't wait to return home next week - back to one of the cushiest cities I've ever known. *g*

verbbis · 2010-02-05 10:11:43

See http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/18153

orschiro · 2010-02-05 10:51:47

So if the system just works fine we simply could ignore that message?

verbbis · 2010-02-10 18:45:40

I think lvm uses some type of a file-based locking mechanism to prevent simultaneous operations on the same machine. The directory where it tries to write a lock file is read-only during boot and that causes the error. Since the operations are being executed at boot-time, simultaneous operations are unlikely to occur.

It has been that way before as well, but the message was redirected to /dev/null. I decide to ignore it

lynix · 2010-02-10 21:29:53

verbbis wrote:

It has been that way before as well, but the message was redirected to /dev/null. I decide to ignore it

D'accord. If this has always been there, just suppressed, I think the devs will re-add the redirection and this issue will be fixed. Will ignore the message until then, too

@orschiro: Awesome indeed Let's meet and have a beer
Besides, Arch seems to be very popular in Karlsruhe, at least among (IT-)students: when I'm at university and look around in the beginning of lectures, I see Arch-bootups everywhere around me - these days all with the issue we're discussing here

Last edited by lynix (2010-02-10 21:30:25)

orschiro · 2010-02-10 22:35:40

Ok guys, let's await the update and hope they fix it. I prefer to boot without any warnings.

@lynix,

why not. Nothing tastes better than a ordentlich's Vogel Bier.

But that's a new information. I always heard from students how satisfied they "were" with Ubuntu. Obviously this opinion changed.

ngky · 2010-02-14 12:12:12

Same here.
Encountered the following issues after the recent libpng/libjpeg/kernel/lvm2/filesystem-2010.01-1 upgrade too.

:: Activating LVM2 Groups
  File-based locking initialisation failed

Disk /dev/dm-0 doesn't contain a valid partition table
...
Disk /dev/dm-1 doesn't contain a valid partition table
...

And also

g_module_open() failed for /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.10.0/loaders/io-wmf.so: libjpeg.so.7: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

Infin1ty · 2010-02-14 17:20:32

ngky wrote:

Same here.
Encountered the following issues after the recent libpng/libjpeg/kernel/lvm2/filesystem-2010.01-1 upgrade too.

:: Activating LVM2 Groups
  File-based locking initialisation failed

Disk /dev/dm-0 doesn't contain a valid partition table
...
Disk /dev/dm-1 doesn't contain a valid partition table
...

And also

g_module_open() failed for /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.10.0/loaders/io-wmf.so: libjpeg.so.7: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

I don't think those errors relates to the lvm , except the file-based locking one.

it seems as the last error you get actually relates to libpng/libjpeg upgrade.

people are getting the file-based locking error because /var/{run,lock} is not being mounted as read/write before the bootup process activate the LVM groups so it can't find a dir to save the run/lock dirs/files, that's why you are getting those errors.
it should be fixed as soon as they all find a good solution for this, it seems as to put /var/{run,lock} on tmpfs is the way, but it's still negotiable...
so you can ignore this error for sure.

the other ones, you can search and you will find the solution.

lynix · 2010-02-14 20:51:09

I'd be interested in a solution for that "valid file table" thing. Already used the forum search, but didn't find the solution you mentioned, Infin1ty.

This is not a real problem as the message saying that there is no valid partition table on my dm-* is absolutely right. These are my logical volumes, so why should they contain a partition table. But why didn't fdisk complain about that in the past?

orschiro · 2010-02-20 14:59:05

Any changes due to the latest updates?

brendan · 2010-02-28 13:18:53

I've only just noticed this error message. Seems from reading it's nothing but still weird.

orschiro · 2010-02-28 22:26:02

Well except the "Activating LVM2 Groups" all errors were solved due to some new updates.

Medieval_Creations · 2010-05-16 15:58:55

I've only just started using LVM on my home file server and was receiving the same error. I've used the Arch installer to create an encrypted LVM for my system on my laptop and never got that message. After looking at some of the conf files I only noticed 1 difference. In the rc.conf it says to change USELVM="no" to "yes" and that's what I did on my server which is getting the message. On my laptop it still says "no" and the LVM works fine without getting that error.

I change it to "no" on the server and haven't noticed any ill effects to running it that way as of yet and it's a quick hack if you really hate looking at that message at boot.

Last edited by Medieval_Creations (2010-05-16 16:00:18)

orschiro · 2010-05-16 18:11:31

Thanks for your notice. I still get the error but don't bother about it. Everything is working without any problem.

Arch Linux

#1 2010-02-03 21:17:30

File-based locking initialisation failed

#2 2010-02-04 17:18:56

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#3 2010-02-05 09:50:22

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#4 2010-02-05 10:05:45

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#5 2010-02-05 10:11:43

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#6 2010-02-05 10:51:47

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#7 2010-02-10 18:45:40

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#8 2010-02-10 21:29:53

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#9 2010-02-10 22:35:40

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#10 2010-02-14 12:12:12

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#11 2010-02-14 17:20:32

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#12 2010-02-14 20:51:09

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#13 2010-02-20 14:59:05

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#14 2010-02-28 13:18:53

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#15 2010-02-28 22:26:02

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#16 2010-05-16 15:58:55

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

#17 2010-05-16 18:11:31

Re: File-based locking initialisation failed

Board footer