LinuxQuestions.org - Root Partition Mounting Problems on First Boot

- Slackware - Installation (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-installation-40/)

- - Root Partition Mounting Problems on First Boot (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-installation-40/root-partition-mounting-problems-on-first-boot-578221/)

Root Partition Mounting Problems on First Boot

I'm trying to install slackware on an older system (200 Mhz AMD-K6, 32 MB RAM).

No matter what packages I include during the install, I get this error during boot,

Code:

udevd-event[1900]: udevd_node_mknodL mknod(/dev/pty/s139, 020660, 3, 139) failed: No space left on device

This repeats for every device udev supports.

Likewise, syslogd has the same problem.

Code:

Starting syslogd daemons: /usr/sbin/syslogd syslogd: cannot create /dev/log: No space left on device

There is 5GB free space on the disk (It's a 6 GB drive) according to df -h (run with a bootdisk). This seems like an odd error to have during a fresh install.

My partition scheme is as follows,

Code:

1 - (bootable) 1-700 Linux [EXT3]

2 - 701-782 Linux Swap [Swap]

Another annoying error (one I had back when I had gentoo on this box long ago) is that during boot, it always tries to do a DMA scan on the HDD, though the drive is old and DMA does not work, it however runs this long scan EVERYTIME it boots... (though the system worked fine back on gentoo), is there a way to turn this check off completely?

One last annoyance, during the install certain packages would cause the installer to hang and simply report "Killed" and return me to the command prompt. Perhaps it's a CD error? My latest install went without issue as I only installed the base A packages (though I get the EXACT same errors if I do my normal setup or even a full complete install).

Any solutions would be greatly appreciated.

How do we know the errors are not related to the small RAM size? 32MB is pretty small for any OS--maybe too small for slackware.

What is the numbering for the partitioning--eg 700 what?? Can you post the output of "fdisk -l"?

http://www.slackware.com/install/sysreq.php

According to the source, it _should_ run under 32MB of RAM. Though the site may be outdated with the latest release (my discs are Version 12)

700 is the number of cylinders. The root partition has ~5.5GB and the swap has ~600MB.

fdisk -l reports

Code:

Disk /dev/hda: 6448 MB

255 Heads, 63 sectors/track, 784 cylinders

Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225200 bytes



Device      Boot  Start  End  Blocks        Id  System

/dev/hda1  *            1  700  5622718+  83  Linux 

/dev/hda2            701  784      67430    82  Linux Swap

One thing worth noting is that to boot, I had to use the huge.s kernel (huge.smp was not supported by my processor). However, the latest install never asked me to choose a kernel :/

Hmmm, apparently adding a 128 MB stick I had lying around allowed the machine to boot. I'd rather not use that for this machine though. I'm surprised Slackware had so much trouble, It seems like one of the best candidates for older hardware.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zykhou (Post 2864038)

Code:

Disk /dev/hda: 6448 MB

255 Heads, 63 sectors/track, 784 cylinders

Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225200 bytes



Device      Boot  Start  End  Blocks        Id  System

/dev/hda1  *            1  700  5622718+  83  Linux 

/dev/hda2            701  784      67430    82  Linux Swap

One thing worth noting is that to boot, I had to use the huge.s kernel (huge.smp was not supported by my processor). However, the latest install never asked me to choose a kernel :/

Hi,

The system requirements link is old information but standard. The newer Slackware 12.0 on older hardware can present some problems.

Most people have had better luck with rolling back to Slackware 11.0 or even 10.2 on systems of your type. I'm not saying 12 won't work but you are going to experience some unusual problems. Therefore requiring more effort!

The problems shouldn't be CPU related but udev and hardware support. You will mostly likely need to compile a custom kernel for the hardware.

Yes, you should increase the RAM to as much as possible for the machine, no matter which release you choose. The machine performance will be better with the increased RAM.

Quote:

Yes, you should increase the RAM to as much as possible for the machine, no matter which release you choose. The machine performance will be better with the increased RAM.

Amen and Hallelujah!!!!--I once had a Windows box which would slow to a crawl when used by my spouse (What do you mean I can't have 10 browsers and 15 instances of Word open at once???!!!)

Moving from 128M to 192M made a world of difference. In your case, just going from 32 to 64 might solve most issues.