On Thursday 24 March 2005 23:14, Jelle Boomstra wrote:
> On Thursday 24 March 2005 22:57, Jim Carter wrote:
> > The only problem is, there's no easy way on the host to mount a partition
> > (that I know of). You need a working UML, and you temporarily attach the
> > image file to it and do your th
On Thursday 24 March 2005 22:57, Jim Carter wrote:
> The only problem is, there's no easy way on the host to mount a partition
> (that I know of). You need a working UML, and you temporarily attach the
> image file to it and do your thing.
Blaisorblade posted a handy script here a while back that
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Zev Benjamin wrote:
> a 2.6.10 UML, that file shows devices with names like ubda and ubdb1. Under a
> 2.4.27 UML, that file shows devices with names like ubd/disc0/disk and
> ubd/disc1/part1. The problem is that I'm trying to do the install under
> 2.6.10 (afs drivers don't
On Monday 21 March 2005 04:06, Zev Benjamin wrote:
> Hi,
> I've been wrestling with getting UML to run under an installer
> (Linux/Athena), and I've run into some ubd naming issues. The installer
> looks at /proc/partitions to ensure that you've entered a valid
> partition name. Under a 2.6.10 UM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Zev Benjamin wrote:
| Hi,
| I've been wrestling with getting UML to run under an installer
| (Linux/Athena), and I've run into some ubd naming issues. The installer
| looks at /proc/partitions to ensure that you've entered a valid
| partition name. Un
Hi,
I've been wrestling with getting UML to run under an installer
(Linux/Athena), and I've run into some ubd naming issues. The installer
looks at /proc/partitions to ensure that you've entered a valid
partition name. Under a 2.6.10 UML, that file shows devices with names
like ubda and ubdb1