LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Slackware (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)
-   -   fuse control filesystem already available (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/fuse-control-filesystem-already-available-4175487060/)

hedron 12-05-2013 11:50 PM

fuse control filesystem already available
 
I just compiled kernel 3.12.3 and it keeps giving me the above error. It then interrupts the boot process and says that an error occurred during the root filesystem check and I should do an fsck. This was just after the USB devices were scanned by the kernel.

I already tried booting with the install disc and running fsck.ext4. So, I don't think it's that. I believe that I have something set incorrectly in make menuconfig. Tomorrow, I'm going to try disabling fuse altogether.

I'm just thinking that maybe someone here has a better idea. Well, better than google, since google has no clue on the issue.

ReaperX7 12-06-2013 04:04 AM

Certain packages that use various parts of the kernel often must be rebuilt against a new kernel and fuse isn't exempt from this if you change major kernel revisions.

You may have to chroot back in and rebuild fuse's module.

hedron 12-06-2013 06:32 PM

Hmm.. I did removepkg fuse-blah-blah and now the boot sequence halts at the same time right after the USB except it doesn't mention anything about fuse. I don't know what fuse is and I don't think I'll even use it.

The error message now reads:

Testing root filesystem status read-only filesytem
checking root filesystem
fsck.ext4 exec format error

**an error occurred during the root filesystem check. **
** you will now be given a chance to log into the ***
** system single user blah blah ... ***

...or so...

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReaperX7
You may have to chroot back in and rebuild fuse's module.

Are you telling me there's no way to do this without jumping through hoops? I'm not really sure what you mean. I don't know how to cross compile. It's hard enough deciphering whether or not I need CRC functions or not or why I am being forced to select some of them. There isn't whole lot of explanation in regards to some of the more cryptic kernel options. I generally go by the rule that if I don't know what it is, then I don't need it. But that usually leads me into perplexing errors like this one.

ReaperX7 12-06-2013 10:41 PM

When you built the kernel did you go off a Slackware kernel config schematic?

hedron 12-07-2013 12:06 AM

I started with the default huge smp kernel config and removed a ton of stuff I thought wasn't needed. Basically, I'd come across an option and if it was a device I knew wasn't part of my set up I'd disable it. If it was an option I'd generally do what my intuition told me to do superseded by what the help file told me to do. I know that's not entirely scientific, but lacking a thorough guide to hold my hand it's the only way I can do it.

I briefly searched for a minimal config file. I'll into it in more detail tomorrow.

gnashley 12-07-2013 01:15 AM

I'd sooner use the config file for the generic kernel as a starting point. For most setups, all you need to add is support for your root '/' filesystem as a hard-linked option. Then, just leave the rest alone -as modules.

turtleli 12-07-2013 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hedron (Post 5076709)
I don't know what fuse is and I don't think I'll even use it.

Fuse is for userspace filesystems i.e. ntfs-3g. It is not your source of problems.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hedron (Post 5076709)
fsck.ext4 exec format error

This looks like the source of the problem. Can you check if CONFIG_BINFMT_SCRIPT is enabled in your kernel configuration (Executable file formats / Emulations -> Kernel support for scripts starting with #!)? fsck.ext4 is a script called by fsck which cannot run if support is disabled.

Is there a reason you need to compile a newer kernel?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReaperX7 (Post 5076396)
Certain packages that use various parts of the kernel often must be rebuilt against a new kernel and fuse isn't exempt from this if you change major kernel revisions.

I don't think this is true except for packages which have external kernel modules. Do you have examples otherwise?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:05 AM.