[ale] Boot issues - OR - why Mafia$oft hurts/disappoints everyone endlessly

[Michael H. Warfield]

All right...

Call to order.  Point of order.

On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 18:49 -0500, arxaaron wrote: 
> It kills me when I consider the massive waste of man hours or
> witness the endless frustrations and emotional angst generated
> daily by Mafia$oft and all their incompetent and obstructive
> Windisease products.

Everyone please step back and stand down for a moment and take a deep
breath.  I think very few on this list will argue that I'm not one of
the best analysts and diagnosticians here.  And I certainly enjoy a
bloody good damn rant as much as the next person, just ask our good
friend, Todd Lewis, who stepped right in front of one of my nuclear
tirades years ago in another forum and can testify to my qualifications
there too.

Aaron, we are just going to have to agree to disagree at this point.
While I totally agree that this two drive configuration is probably a
contributing factor here, it's not all of the story, at least not in my
mind, not yet.  Did you (any of you) even bother to look at and read
that screen shot she posted?  Something is not right there.  I know how
that shit works and it did not work there.  It loaded a kernel and could
not find the bloody root fs.  If it recognizes the drives and the
partitions, it's going to find them.  This was not grub getting
confused!  Grub loaded the bloody kernel and presumably (though that's
one question in doubt) found and loaded the bloody initramfs.  That
kernel was loaded and could not find the root fs.  I've seen this
problem (though NOT in large TB+ SATA drives - only in smaller IDEs).
I'm NOT CONVINCED.  I do not believe we have a definitive answer here
about what the problem is and that makes the rant more than a little
premature.

And let me make this very clear.  I do NOT see my time spent on this to
be a waste of my time, especially if it leads me to other understanding.
There is something going on here that I don't quite understand (like why
does and older Debian behave and the newer stuff lock up) and writing it
off this way is simply premature.  There have been simply too many times
things like this has let me down the path to a more fundamental problem.
I was the one that uncovered some of the initrd problems when they took
out some of the damn delays and waits to go asynchronous.

And if the ultimate answer is not merely the two drive situation with
Windows on the primary drive, I'd certainly hate to see you look like
a .... well, like you were being judgmental and jumping to conclusions.

This did not help.  At best, the OP will ignore you.  At worst, she'll
walk off dejected thinking all Linux users are jerks or worse and I'll
never know what the heart of her problem was.

Everybody please hold the anti MS rants and rages until we can at least
get a better idea of what the problem is or reserve it for one of the
frequent anti MS tirades.  The time for ranting and raging on this issue
is not YET ripe.  It may yes be justified, it's just premature in this
case.  IN MY JUDGMENT.

Regards,
Mike

> What did we have here? Some 20 messages and a dozen
> diagnostic suggestions over 3 or 4 man hours of squandered
> volunteer assistance because it was never made clear that there
> were two drives in the problematic system and that the main
> drive was an active windisease boot disk?  Even more galling
> and insane is that the Mafia$oft victim in this case was blaming
> their frustrations on the wrong entity entirely, and in the subject
> line of their plea for help no less.
> 
> This kind of insanity is why my mantra will forever remain
> "I DON'T DO WINDOWS."
> Mafia$oft computer environments are the biggest time sucking
> black hole of human misery and frustration in the universe.
> 
> If someone is too blind to see the source of all their problems
> when it is repeatedly beating them over the head, then they
> may be beyond helping.
> 
> peace
> aaron
> 
> On 2010/11/28, at 11:33 , William Fragakis wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 10:52 -0500, Narahari 'n' Savitha wrote:
> >> Can I force to use grub 1.x ?
> >> Is there a real benefit to use grub 2.x ?
> >>
> >> Any one using Linux on a 1TB drive at all ?  I am beginning to doubt
> >> Linux's ability to run on a 1TB drive.
> 
> > Is the bios updated on your motherboard? Have you made any bios  
> > changes?
> >
> > I may have missed this in previous posts but which particular
> > brand/model hard drive are you using?
> >
> > Linux can very well run/boot on a 1TB drive - I realize that you may  
> > be
> > very well frustrated at this point but questions like that aren't
> > probably very helpful or productive.
> >
> > William
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> -Narahari
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
> 

-- 
Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 985-6132 |  mhw at WittsEnd.com
   /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/          | (678) 463-0932 |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
   NIC whois: MHW9          | An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0x674627FF        | possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20101128/4487bcb8/attachment.bin