Cant install grub to raid10 /boot


Recommended Posts

okay so this is where i fell down before with grub, according to the wiki

http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/RAID/Software

Since the /boot partition is a RAID, grub cannot read it to get the bootloader. It can only access physical drives. Thus, you still use (hd0,0) in this step.
Run grub:
grub --no-floppy
You must see GRUB prompt:
grub>

If you are using a RAID 1 mirror disk system, you will want to install grub on all the disks in the system, so that when one disk fails, you are still able to boot. The find command above will list the disks, e.g.
grub> find /boot/grub/stage1
 (hd0,0)
 (hd1,0)
grub>

and this is what i get

grub> find /boot/grub/stage1

Error 15: File not found


also tried


grub> find /boot/grub/stage1
Error 12: Invalid device requested

grub> root (hd0,0)
 Filesystem type is ext2fs, partition type 0xfd

grub> setup (hd0)
 Checking if "/boot/grub/stage1" exists... no
 Checking if "/grub/stage1" exists... no

Error 15: File not found

ls /boot/grub
default     e2fs_stage1_5  ffs_stage1_5  iso9660_stage1_5  menu.lst        reiserfs_stage1_5  stage1  stage2_eltorito  vstafs_stage1_5
device.map  fat_stage1_5   grub.conf     jfs_stage1_5      minix_stage1_5  splash.xpm.gz      stage2  ufs2_stage1_5    xfs_stage1_5

should i just be pointing it to /dev/grub ?

edit: seems grub (legacy) has issues with raid10, should I try grub2 or break md0 and make it raid1?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1122594-cant-install-grub-to-raid10-boot/
Share on other sites

Good to know that you got it working. Would you mind posting a link to the Gentoo discussion though? It might help someone else who stumbles across this thread, and I'm a little curious.

PS: I'd also be interested to know why you chose GRUB Legacy over GRUB 2.

Havent got it working yet, decided to redo the whole thing, went with grub as that is what the wiki advised if you are using the old 0.90 superblock for autoraid, I could use grub2 shouldn't be that much in it, should just need to add dolvm and domdadm in grub file

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-943666.html

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-943156.html

Thanks for the links! That thread is very interesting (and informative). I've never done anything of the sort before.

I have great respect for the Gentoo developers, but I, along with many other Debian developers it seems, often philosophically disagree with them. For the most part this tends to stem from their reluctance to embrace new ways of doing things. (Take a look at the Gentoo systemd discussion.) They make Debian developers look liberal in that regard -- and that's really saying something! I suspect that's why they (or the Gentoo wiki) recommended GRUB Legacy over GRUB 2.

all sorted now, its encrypted, have added keys to the raid so i dont have to enter a passphrase, had to go with raid1 for /boot - just updating it and putting im a few things i require :) - as for grub and such, like with most things on gentoo it is there but masked, you can use it if you wish, and then use the forums for help should you require it, it will hit the stable branch in time :)

GRUB2 is better than GRUB original in the features it provides, other than that, GRUB legacy trumples GRUB2 in all aspects.

You can boot up to GRUB and boot anything from the command line, for GRUB2 you'd need a book to lookup and type all the rubbish it needs.

Also why would anyone switch from a reliable fully-proven system that's been in use mostly flawlessly for years to a newer system (systemd) that's lined with bugs, much slower, and doesn't actually have any enhancements?

GRUB2 is better than GRUB original in the features it provides, other than that, GRUB legacy trumples GRUB2 in all aspects.

You can boot up to GRUB and boot anything from the command line, for GRUB2 you'd need a book to lookup and type all the rubbish it needs.

Also why would anyone switch from a reliable fully-proven system that's been in use mostly flawlessly for years to a newer system (systemd) that's lined with bugs, much slower, and doesn't actually have any enhancements?

I completely disagree with you. However, I beg you, please don't start this discussion again. You can read a thorough discussion of all sides of this issue on debian-devel here and here. Its gotten nearly as bad as the Windows 8 love/hate threads. (I said nearly. Its not quite that bad yet!)

I completely disagree with you. However, I beg you, please don't start this discussion again. You can read a thorough discussion of all sides of this issue on debian-devel here and here. Its gotten nearly as bad as the Windows 8 love/hate threads. (I said nearly. Its not quite that bad yet!)

Interesting reads.

My point isn't that systemd isn't worth anything, it's that it's been released in a junk state. I switched gdm for xdm now, the first 2 boots it was fine, bit slow to open, but fine. Since then, on every boot, it doesn't load xdm up at all, if I login as root and start is using systemctl then it'll open. There's some other programs that haven't worked either and have needed their systemd files changing so they actually run. If I worked for a bank and replaced their whole system with something that sometimes didn't bother carrying out transactions - I'd be fired, instantly and sued for damages. Systemd is incomplete, if they had waited until it was stable and working with the majority of software, then it'd be worthwhile releasing.

OK, n_k; maybe we agree a little more than I previous thought. I apologize for judging you so quickly.

Honestly, based on what I have read about Arch's switch to systemd, your problems seem to be mostly related to the Arch developer's tendency to jump first. In some cases that's a good thing. Arch is known for having bleeding-edge packages, unlike slower-moving-but-more-stable distributions like Debian. If you take a look at the current status of systemd in Debian Wheezy/Sid, its in similar shape. However, unlike Arch, Debian is still shipping sysvinit as the default in Wheezy; systemd will likely make its appearance as default in Jesse.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!