I wrote:
>Now I'll try to go back through my logs and try to see when sdubby
>got installed and why.
Jonathan Billings wrote:
>Once you've verified it boots into new kernels, feel free to delete
>the /boot/efi/$MACHINE_ID and /boot/efi/entries directory, so you
>aren't wasting space on the EFI vol
Dave Close wrote:
> Now I'll try to go back through my logs and try to see when sdubby
> got installed and why.
Once you've verified it boots into new kernels, feel free to delete the
/boot/efi/$MACHINE_ID and /boot/efi/entries directory, so you aren't wasting
space on the EFI volume or preventi
"Jonathan Billings" wrote:
>I suspect I know why this happened.
>
>Do you have the "sdubby" or "systemd-boot-unsigned" package installed
>(which brings in sdubby)?
>
>The sdubby package installs an /etc/kernel/install.conf that
>tells the kernel-install script that runs in the kernel-core
>%post t
Dave Close wrote:
> Comparing your list to mine, I was struck by the size of /boot/efi.
> The size of mine is inflated by one directory of 288M,
> /boot/efi/7cf63543075b47d48d09f1649641c3a1. I don't know what that
> is or why it's there. But the contents look suggestive:
> # ls -lR /boot/efi/7cf63
> On 13 Aug 2024, at 17:58, Dave Close wrote:
>
> Comparing your list to mine, I was struck by the size of /boot/efi.
> The size of mine is inflated by one directory of 288M,
> /boot/efi/7cf63543075b47d48d09f1649641c3a1. I don't know what that
> is or why it's there. But the contents look sugge
Barry Scott wrote:
>> On 12 Aug 2024, at 03:40, Dave Close wrote:
>>
>> # df -h /boot
>> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
>> /dev/sda6 974M 549M 358M 61% /boot
>>
>> It is held at least three kernels in the past.
>That does seem to have a lot of space used.
>
>Here is
> On 12 Aug 2024, at 03:40, Dave Close wrote:
>
> # df -h /boot
> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/sda6 974M 549M 358M 61% /boot
>
> It is held at least three kernels in the past.
That does seem to have a lot of space used.
Here is mine that has 3 kernels.
$
francis.montag...@inria.fr wrote:
>On Sun, 11 Aug 2024 10:30:14 -0700 Dave Close wrote:
>
>> # dnf -y reinstall kernel-core-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64
>
>> So, what happened to kernel 6.10.3-200? RPM -V says the package is
>> complete but the files are not there!
>
>The missing files are ghost files (
John Pilkington wrote:
>On 11/08/2024 18:30, Dave Close wrote:
>> I can't make sense of this output, can you?
>>
>> # rpm -q kernel-core
>> kernel-core-6.9.9-100.fc39.x86_64
>> kernel-core-6.9.12-200.fc40.x86_64
>> kernel-core-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64
>That kernel runs for me, but I have romm for
Hi.
On Sun, 11 Aug 2024 10:30:14 -0700 Dave Close wrote:
> # dnf -y reinstall kernel-core-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64
> So, what happened to kernel 6.10.3-200? RPM -V says the package is
> complete but the files are not there!
The missing files are ghost files (for RPM, see:
rpm -Vv kernel-core-6.
On 11/08/2024 18:30, Dave Close wrote:
I can't make sense of this output, can you?
# rpm -q kernel-core
kernel-core-6.9.9-100.fc39.x86_64
kernel-core-6.9.12-200.fc40.x86_64
kernel-core-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64
That kernel runs for me, but I have romm for only two.
How big is /boot ?
--
__
I can't make sense of this output, can you?
# rpm -q kernel-core
kernel-core-6.9.9-100.fc39.x86_64
kernel-core-6.9.12-200.fc40.x86_64
kernel-core-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64
# rpm -V kernel-core-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64
# dnf -y reinstall kernel-core-6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64
Last metadata expiration chec
12 matches
Mail list logo
