Maybe this can be optimized?dmesg wrote:EXT3-fs (sda1): error: couldn't mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
EXT2-fs (sda1): error: couldn't mount because of unsupported optional features (240)
EXT4-fs (sda1): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode
(done) Salix 13.1 filesystem
-
damNageHack
- Posts: 663
- Joined: 24. Sep 2009, 17:07
(done) Salix 13.1 filesystem
Last edited by damNageHack on 20. May 2010, 17:51, edited 1 time in total.
This is the oppinion of the author, it does not force you to share and is signed automatically.
You are free to keep them all errors for your own. Linux is the best game I ever played.
-
damNageHack
- Posts: 663
- Joined: 24. Sep 2009, 17:07
Re: Salix 13.1 filesystem
Yes, works. Great!Shador wrote:You could try adding "rootfstype=ext4" as kernel parameter.
I think it should be added then to standard lilo.conf of Salix 13.1 due to I got the three lines from a fresh installed one. At least if auto-installation was chosen.
# Linux bootable partition config begins
image = /boot/vmlinuz
root = /dev/sda1
label = Linux
read-only
addappend = "rootfstype=ext4"
# Linux bootable partition config ends
This is the oppinion of the author, it does not force you to share and is signed automatically.
You are free to keep them all errors for your own. Linux is the best game I ever played.
Re: Salix 13.1 filesystem
Hum sounds weird that the kernel needs this parameter...
Anyway, why not on damNageHack's proposition.
Anyway, why not on damNageHack's proposition.
Re: Salix 13.1 filesystem
The messages don't hurt... 
Re: Salix 13.1 filesystem
+1
Changes needed to support this are in no relation to those messages. In fact, it would only be additional complexity bound to cause real problems at some point.
If somebody thinks he really needs to get rid of those messages, he can add the parameter himself by his own responsibility.
Changes needed to support this are in no relation to those messages. In fact, it would only be additional complexity bound to cause real problems at some point.
If somebody thinks he really needs to get rid of those messages, he can add the parameter himself by his own responsibility.
-
damNageHack
- Posts: 663
- Joined: 24. Sep 2009, 17:07
Re: Salix 13.1 filesystem
thenktor wrote:The messages don't hurt...
Therefore, I posted in "Suggestions" ...Shador wrote:+1
Changes needed to support this are in no relation to those messages. In fact, it would only be additional complexity bound to cause real problems at some point.
If somebody thinks he really needs to get rid of those messages, he can add the parameter himself by his own responsibility.
A newbie may wonder about the three lines when done automatic installation.
This is the oppinion of the author, it does not force you to share and is signed automatically.
You are free to keep them all errors for your own. Linux is the best game I ever played.
Re: Salix 13.1 filesystem
Yes, and it was considered, but is unlikely to become implemented as we told you. I guess other distros also would have that "problem" with ext4 (and without initrd). Initrd might change some things.damNageHack wrote:Therefore, I posted in "Suggestions" ...
So what? He would be told that it's harmless.damNageHack wrote:A newbie may wonder about the three lines when done automatic installation.
Re: Salix 13.1 filesystem
A newbie won't think about anything unless something really does not work because he won't check dmesg messagesdamNageHack wrote:A newbie may wonder about the three lines when done automatic installation.
Re: (done) Salix 13.1 filesystem
Aren't those messages gone when you make an initrd and boot the generic kernel instead?