On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 23:03 -0800, MHR wrote: > On Jan 24, 2008 12:29 PM, William L. Maltby <CentOS4Bill at 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. http://www.pastebin.org/16939 > > Thanks. > > mhr > <snip sig stuff> HTH -- Bill