On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 23:03 -0800, MHR wrote:
On Jan 24, 2008 12:29 PM, William L. Maltby CentOS4Bill@triad.rr.com wrote:
df /boot;df -i boot # ?
Not a problem - lots of space (70%) and inodes (99%) available.
Sounds like maybe space is tight? Kernel made it in, but not grub.conf?
Lots of space.
Also, on my 5 box, there is no grub/grub.conf, like there is on 4. It's just menu.lst
I have both, and /tc/grub.conf is linked to /boot/grub/grub.conf....
Further, I discovered by outside-the-box activities that the update may be sensitive to the contents of menu.lst. For sure, any changes to the title lines. I'm keeping eyes wide open to see if the comment lines have effect - I suspect not.
The grub.conf and menu.lst are identical.
Any other suggestions?
Only thing I can think of now are things that I don't know about the update process's sensitivity. Order of occurrences, inter-line whitespace, etc. Here's my 5.0 menu.list. *BUT*, I recently modified it to move my LFS entry to the bottom so it is no longer the default entry. I won't know if it's still working until another update.
URL below is to my 5.x (modified by me) and my 4.x (box stock with normal updates). Maybe something visual will spark a clue? It often does for me.
GOTCHAS: *leading whitespace are TABS! This bites me a lot of times.
Thanks.
mhr
<snip sig stuff>
HTH