> On 12. apr 2017, at 22:48, Chris H wrote:
>
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 23:42:52 +0900 (JST) Masachika ISHIZUKA
> mailto:i...@amail.plala.or.jp>> wrote
>
>>> replaced /boot/loader with /boot/loader.old (which was from end of
>>> March)
>>>
>>> copied /boot/loader.efi from the r315864 snapshot USB
> On 12. apr 2017, at 22:48, Chris H wrote:
>
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 23:42:52 +0900 (JST) Masachika ISHIZUKA
> mailto:i...@amail.plala.or.jp>> wrote
>
>>> replaced /boot/loader with /boot/loader.old (which was from end of
>>> March)
>>>
>>> copied /boot/loader.efi from the r315864 snapshot USB
On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 23:42:52 +0900 (JST) Masachika ISHIZUKA
wrote
> > replaced /boot/loader with /boot/loader.old (which was from end of
> > March)
> >
> > copied /boot/loader.efi from the r315864 snapshot USB image
> > into /boot/loader.efi of the broken systems.
> >
> > Aprt from the fact tha
>> I'm using dell xps12 9q33 (core i7-4500U) with an internal SSD.
>> As reporting Bug 218473, I cannot boot /boot/loader.efi after
>> r316585. Replacing only loader.efi before r316584, I can boot
>> again.
>
> Yea, it seems to be the same issue for both of you, now have some work to do
> to i
> On 11. apr 2017, at 17:42, Masachika ISHIZUKA wrote:
>
>> replaced /boot/loader with /boot/loader.old (which was from end of
>> March)
>>
>> copied /boot/loader.efi from the r315864 snapshot USB image
>> into /boot/loader.efi of the broken systems.
>>
>> Aprt from the fact that I don't know
> replaced /boot/loader with /boot/loader.old (which was from end of
> March)
>
> copied /boot/loader.efi from the r315864 snapshot USB image
> into /boot/loader.efi of the broken systems.
>
> Aprt from the fact that I don't know which one is broken, the boxes are
> booting again.
>
> Conclusion
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 21:04:04 +0200
"O. Hartmann" wrote:
> Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 21:59:00 +0300
> Toomas Soome schrieb:
>
> > > On 10. apr 2017, at 21:04, O. Hartmann
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:14:21 +0300
> > > Toomas Soome schrieb:
> > >
> > >>> On 10. apr 2017, at 1
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 21:04:04 +0200
"O. Hartmann" wrote:
> Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 21:59:00 +0300
> Toomas Soome schrieb:
>
> > > On 10. apr 2017, at 21:04, O. Hartmann
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:14:21 +0300
> > > Toomas Soome schrieb:
> > >
> > >>> On 10. apr 2017, at 1
Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 21:59:00 +0300
Toomas Soome schrieb:
> > On 10. apr 2017, at 21:04, O. Hartmann wrote:
> >
> > Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:14:21 +0300
> > Toomas Soome schrieb:
> >
> >>> On 10. apr 2017, at 15:58, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> >>>
> >>> After today's update to r316677, some UEFI b
> On 10. apr 2017, at 21:04, O. Hartmann wrote:
>
> Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:14:21 +0300
> Toomas Soome schrieb:
>
>>> On 10. apr 2017, at 15:58, Hartmann, O. wrote:
>>>
>>> After today's update to r316677, some UEFI boxes (Fujitsu Celsius M740
>>> XEON) reject to boot properly. They die immed
Am Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:14:21 +0300
Toomas Soome schrieb:
> > On 10. apr 2017, at 15:58, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> >
> > After today's update to r316677, some UEFI boxes (Fujitsu Celsius M740
> > XEON) reject to boot properly. They die immediately after
> > loading /boot/loader.efi and jump into loa
> On 10. apr 2017, at 15:58, Hartmann, O. wrote:
>
> After today's update to r316677, some UEFI boxes (Fujitsu Celsius M740
> XEON) reject to boot properly. They die immediately after
> loading /boot/loader.efi and jump into loader prompt:
>
> [...]
> \
> can't load 'kernel'
>
>
> I had to in
12 matches
Mail list logo