From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QLwep-0001f8-M5 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 16 May 2011 12:12:19 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A41251C0D6; Mon, 16 May 2011 12:10:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yx0-f181.google.com (mail-yx0-f181.google.com [209.85.213.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D3CF1C0D6 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 12:10:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yxm8 with SMTP id 8so2035413yxm.40 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 05:10:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0ozCxxkr0ZjuhXlIrUoxOjm80+/eovipY+ewUUAoTJI=; b=g4CEzG1Bk8gyw1dFIVhumgbCUkk1+cCjpOKZ7N9caUbNA8Cw2fnJfy8F3IVuJo0lxB TuOm85IvDBVVD1+bvKVAzI8d26NaW8h0OgvF6tL1uf1VXTLYc1CdM1wYE9K4H2UceNka i90QlXfeUqpHLCnfNU1iF44ieCbupGK093H6g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ssGQAz3yPlN2AR78P7c9AzUxdEmuKoRPfnYnKJSGUhXu1RnR4cunc8JQd7FE+0dD2k imqzjHr2BYtfxTF1uYQcsDF8H2stgxmvfjKPoXXzaQNYdTu2wtsEY+Sl2LGN7ciEg7iQ e4wo4VHbogfQHbtmhonUE57Ri6AdUyO5dwq00= Received: by 10.150.182.8 with SMTP id e8mr3429058ybf.425.1305547855890; Mon, 16 May 2011 05:10:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-65-0-94-119.jan.bellsouth.net [65.0.94.119]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v35sm1515729yba.4.2011.05.16.05.10.53 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 16 May 2011 05:10:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4DD1144C.9080903@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 07:10:52 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110501 Gentoo/2.0.14 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] grub menu and the new openrc References: <4DCFAC1F.1030101@gmail.com> <4DD08233.9010203@gmail.com> <201105160709.49022.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201105160709.49022.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 241075701ca607928c6cb56349c6debe Mick wrote: > On Monday 16 May 2011 02:47:31 Dale wrote: > >> Daniel da Veiga wrote: >> >>> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 20:12, Dale>> >>> > wrote: >>> Daniel da Veiga wrote: >>> I have a similar entry, but have never used the softlevel= >>> flag, I simply append "single" at the end of the kernel call >>> and it boots in single user (root password or ctrl+d to >>> continue). >>> >>> I did get this to work: >>> >>> title Gentoo single user >>> kernel (hd0,0)/bzImage-2.6.38-r5-1 root=/dev/sda3 rw single >>> >>> So, all I need now is to figure out how to get this work: >>> >>> >>> title Gentoo boot level >>> kernel (hd0,0)/bzImage-2.6.38-r5-1 root=/dev/sda3 softlevel=boot >>> >>> It appears the softlevel= is no longer working with the new >>> openrc. It looks like the docs need to be updated. I also tried >>> init= and it doesn't work either. >>> > Did you try creating a new runlevel (dale_special) and then booting into it by > appending softlevel=dale_special ? > > That will prove if the Gentoo softlevel mechanism is no longer available. > > > I tried some of the other runlevels, nonetwork, single, boot and none of those work except for single by just putting "rw single" in the boot line. Single doesn't work if I select it by using softlevel=single. That does work if I am in default then switch to single in a console tho. That would be using the "rc single" command. I used to have another runlevel that I created myself but I removed it a good while back when I got boot set up like I wanted. It appears that openrc has not been told what softlevel is. I do see where it is passed on to the OS from grub during the boot process tho. >>> Time to go farther up the food chain I guess. The docs need to be >>> changed at least. >>> >>> Updated docs are always good, but I wonder why do you need this. >>> If I need single user I simply press "e", edit the line and add >>> single, followed by a "b" to boot. That is a for maintenance only so I >>> really don't see a need for it at grub menu, same wth the other >>> runlevels, all you gotta do is append "nox" or use Interactive (again, >>> this is only if something is broken, I can't see myself doing this >>> twice in a week)... >>> > I think that nox brings you all the way up to runlevel 3, not runlevel 1. > > > I have used nox before on a CD. The reason I like to use the ones I already have is that I already know exactly what is running and what is not. When I boot to single by adding "rw single" to the end of the boot line, I still have to start some services to get where I want to be. Being able to boot to the boot runlevel is much better since I have some things already set to start. Openrc doesn't mount things listed in fstab such as /home/ portage and /var which are separate partitions. >> The thing is, I do use them which is why I went to the trouble of >> setting them up to begin with. I actually use them pretty regular. >> Just because others don't use them doesn't mean that I don't or shouldn't. >> >> I tried to use them is how I figured out it didn't work anymore. That >> alone shows that I use them for various reasons. This update is less >> than a week old and I already found out that this doesn't work anymore. >> I just want to figure out how it works with openrc which it appears no >> one has a answer and the docs are wrong as well. >> > The definitive answer is that the gentoo "single" softlevel does not work. > The Linux standard "single" or "S" or "1" runlevel works fine (but I can't > recall if I tried "1" recently). > > So the question remains what is happening with other softlevels if you care to > create them. > > I'm beginning to think that openrc goes back to the "old" Linux way. In other words, it uses the init levels instead of softlevels. The only thing that makes me think that is not true, init=runlevel doesn't work either. I suspect that init=/bin/bash would work but not tested yet. I have this in inittab: l0:0:wait:/sbin/rc shutdown l0s:0:wait:/sbin/halt -dhp l1:1:wait:/sbin/rc single l2:2:wait:/sbin/rc nonetwork l3:3:wait:/sbin/rc default l4:4:wait:/sbin/rc default l5:5:wait:/sbin/rc default l6:6:wait:/sbin/rc reboot l6r:6:wait:/sbin/reboot -dk I assume I could edit that to look like this: l0:0:wait:/sbin/rc shutdown l0s:0:wait:/sbin/halt -dhp l1:1:wait:/sbin/rc single l2:2:wait:/sbin/rc boot l3:3:wait:/sbin/rc nonetwork l4:4:wait:/sbin/rc default l5:5:wait:/sbin/rc default l6:6:wait:/sbin/rc reboot l6r:6:wait:/sbin/reboot -dk #z6:6:respawn:/sbin/sulogin The only problem with that is that there are more runlevel options than there are lines there for me to add. Even tho I can sort of get to what I want, I still want to get the new way sorted so that I can get the doc team to update the docs. If this has been overlooked, then it may be that the devs will have to add this feature or make other changes so that this is doable. I also posted on the forums. They are equally stumped. I am beginning to think this was over looked somehow. Dale :-) :-)