|
I don't know what kind of dumb stuff Lenovo is doing there, but I'd try using efibootmgr to set it to Boot0014 (startup interrupt) or Boot0012 (splash screen). These may be needed to actually initialize video To get a shell, download a precompiled one, shove it on USB, and use that. EFI executables are pretty universal. It's not a complicated format This sounds like a firmware problem, not a bootloader problem. You can also try blowing away all the entries with efibootmgr, restoring defaults with F1 after rebooting, then using a liveusb to recreate the efivars. This assumes you understand how EFI works a little, though. Lenovo also has a history of bugs here, and adding them at all is a dumb design. It may brick your laptop. Method of last resort. At the very least, it would let you reinstall and a have a working bootloader. Best guess is that Lenovo hardcoded something in the location, and now the drive is FS1: instead of FS0: (EFI uses different conventions for naming), so it broke. Just eliminating the
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 07:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
If a program is built as statically linked executable with no dependencies, does it matter much what distribution it is being run on? It just depends on a kernel, and it's mostly the same between distributions, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 07:52
|
|
|
everythingWasBees posted:
You seem to have 2 GPT partitioned disks. Both of those have an EFI System Partition (ESP). One of them (Boot0001) has Ubuntu's bootloader on it, and has a GPT partition UUID a5302d7c-8957-41ed-8f1a-a6825d4a45c7. The other has both Windows (Boot0000) and Arch (Boot0002) on it, and has a GPT partition UUID 586b0374-6815-45a9-8aba-c557dd3648b6. The current boot order is specified to first try starting Arch, then USB HDD, USB CD, USB floppy, then two NVMe slots and the first HDD (possibly using a BIOS-style boot process?). If all these attempts fail, then it attempts to boot Windows via UEFI, then all the other HDDs using BIOS boot style and then network boot. Run "blkid /dev/<whatever>" to all your disk partitions: it should report, among other things, PARTUUID=<some UUID>. When the PARTUUID matches one of the UUIDs mentioned above, you know which EFI System Partition at least one of the boot entries is referring to. You said it "seems to skip systemd and all the EFI nonsense" on the way to Arch. It does not look like that to me: it looks like it is successfully using the first configured bootloader, which happens to be Arch's, so you'll unconditionally get Arch as quickly as possible. "BootCurrent: 0002" indicates that the Boot0002 line was the one that got the system to where it is now. As it is listed as the first one in the BootOrder and contains the Arch bootloader, it looks like nothing is failing and UEFI is doing exactly what it says it's configured to do. Perhaps the presence of the second ESP partition is confusing the systemd-bootx64 bootloader (or the firmware-based ESP detection routine the bootloader is relying on): if there is no Windows bootloader on that ESP partition, it probably assumes there are no bootloaders other than systemd-bootx64 itself, and goes on with booting Arch without further delay. If that is the case, it might be helpful to use parted or gdisk (or maybe GPT-aware fdisk, if Arch has one) to change the partition type of the ESP partition that contains the remains of Ubuntu bootloader, so that it (hopefully) no longer can be detected by UEFI as an ESP partition. Or you could perhaps remove the Ubuntu ESP partition altogether, unless you need it for some other reason. @xzzy: I agree with evol262, this is definitely all UEFI firmware/bootloader weirdness. My guess is that either the firmware or the Arch bootloader is making a Highlander-style assumption: "There can be only one" ESP partition in the system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 09:42
|
|
|
Forgall posted:If a program is built as statically linked executable with no dependencies, does it matter much what distribution it is being run on? It just depends on a kernel, and it's mostly the same between distributions, right? You're essentially correct. However, there are a few kernel configuration options that may affect old statically-linked programs: - programs that pre-date the introduction of ASLR (glibc 2.14) may fail unless the legacy vsyscall interface is available (CONFIG_LEGACY_VSYSCALL_EMULATE or CONFIG_LEGACY_VSYSCALL_NATIVE is set) - really old (think kernel 1.x.y era) 32-bit executables may use the old a.out executable format instead of the current ELF (originally CONFIG_BINFMT_AOUT; CONFIG_IA32_AOUT on modern 64-bit kernels) There may be others; these are just the ones I recall off the top of my head.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 10:02
|
|
|
Alright, so I got an HP laptop that came with Windows 10 preinstalled last Sunday, and after doing Win10's initial setup (name and what not) I immediately installed Ubuntu 16.04 alongside it and have been running that. Up until last night, whenever I restarted, from POST it'd go into grub to let me select either OS. But now it's only going to Windows 10 by default and I have no clue why. I've tried disabling fast boot in Win10, I've tried messing with the OS boot manager in the BIOS--it's first but whenever I go into the submenu, Windows is above ubuntu, and I can't seem to switch the order (if that'd even help?) and have disabled Secureboot, I've tried boot-repair but not only did that not help, but instead just added a bunch of entries to grub, which I was only able to access after going to Win10's advance restart. It took me a while to figure out I could just press F9 at the POST (which I had to figure out how to widen the time of the delay so I could press any buttons), so I don't have to go through win10 anymore, but I'd still like to figure out the problem area, if possible. Morter fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Dec 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 13:40
|
|
|
Morter posted:Alright, so I got an HP laptop that came with Windows 10 preinstalled last Sunday, and after doing Win10's initial setup (name and what not) I immediately installed Ubuntu 16.04 alongside it and have been running that. Up until last night, whenever I restarted, from POST it'd go into grub to let me select either OS. Win 10 has a habit of taking over the bootloader when it updates, thats all. Microsoft has been actively hostile to any bootloader but theirs for a while now. At least they finally allowed you to have non-windows OSes boot at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 13:47
|
|
|
That's fine, but does it make sense that it'd randomly kick in one day? And is there anyway to fix it, even temporarily? Or am I doomed to F9 mashing? Because like I said, it was working fine prior, and I seriously hadn't made any windows updates or changes since.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 13:52
|
|
|
Morter posted:That's fine, but does it make sense that it'd randomly kick in one day? And is there anyway to fix it, even temporarily? Or am I doomed to F9 mashing? Because like I said, it was working fine prior, and I seriously hadn't made any windows updates or changes since. Windows 10 updates itself, which is why it seems to happen randomly. And you chould be able to fix it by reinstalling your bootloader from linux. I'm not sure how(I don't deal with dualboot for this very reason, I just run Linux VMs if I need bot OSes) but I found this, which discusses it and may help. https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2294337 If that doesn't help, I'm sure one of our more desktop linux guys will be around shortly to give you more custom tailored advice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
Morter posted:That's fine, but does it make sense that it'd randomly kick in one day? And is there anyway to fix it, even temporarily? Or am I doomed to F9 mashing? Because like I said, it was working fine prior, and I seriously hadn't made any windows updates or changes since.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
I was saying to someone at work earlier today (paraphrasing): "I don't actually mind Windows 10... it's a nice OS... I just don't like the way it assumes actions for you and does things because it thinks that's what you want... what you actually want is for it to work nice and not do extra stuff"
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
I've got an old Dell Inspiron 8000 from 2001 sitting around with a P3 1.0GHz processor and 512 MB of RAM, which is the most it's motherboard will allow. It seems that even Lubuntu has grown to require more memory than that, but is that just because of its included Desktop Environment? Would it be possible to install a more lightweight DE to fit its specs? Obviously I'm not going to be watching Youtube videos on the thing, but I want to know if it's even possible to get a distro of Linux with a graphical UI running on it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
A good poster posted:I've got an old Dell Inspiron 8000 from 2001 sitting around with a P3 1.0GHz processor and 512 MB of RAM, which is the most it's motherboard will allow. It seems that even Lubuntu has grown to require more memory than that, but is that just because of its included Desktop Environment? Would it be possible to install a more lightweight DE to fit its specs? I tried PuppyLinux on my old eeepc and it installed with no problem but I had an issue getting my obscure as heck wifi adapter running. But that distro is meant for much older comps, so give it a try.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
A good poster posted:I've got an old Dell Inspiron 8000 from 2001 sitting around with a P3 1.0GHz processor and 512 MB of RAM, which is the most it's motherboard will allow. It seems that even Lubuntu has grown to require more memory than that, but is that just because of its included Desktop Environment? Would it be possible to install a more lightweight DE to fit its specs? According to the Lubuntu site, it'll run fine on 512 megs of RAM, even though your favorite browser might not be very happy: quote:Advanced usage with low RAM https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/AdvancedMethods
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
A good poster posted:I've got an old Dell Inspiron 8000 from 2001 sitting around with a P3 1.0GHz processor and 512 MB of RAM, which is the most it's motherboard will allow. It seems that even Lubuntu has grown to require more memory than that, but is that just because of its included Desktop Environment? Would it be possible to install a more lightweight DE to fit its specs? I'd honestly suggest some flavor of BSD
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
Gentoo. Compile for optimum efficiency 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
Recycle it and buy a raspberry if you want low power computing. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:41
|
|
|
A good poster posted:I've got an old Dell Inspiron 8000 from 2001 sitting around with a P3 1.0GHz processor and 512 MB of RAM, which is the most it's motherboard will allow. It seems that even Lubuntu has grown to require more memory than that, but is that just because of its included Desktop Environment? Would it be possible to install a more lightweight DE to fit its specs? Do have a go at this: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Debian-PIXEL-For-i386 And let us know how well it runs. It's pretty nice on my Pi3. Never tried it on my Pi1, which is currently headless and running a string of Christmas lights. The Pi1 is half a GB RAM, same as your Dell, so it should work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 06:21
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Recycle it and buy a raspberry if you want low power computing. This is the correct answer throw away the old anchor and get a Pi3 you will save the purchase cost in power saving fairly quick.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 06:31
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Recycle it and buy a raspberry if you want low power computing. Varkk posted:This is the correct answer throw away the old anchor and get a Pi3 you will save the purchase cost in power saving fairly quick.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
On the win10 bootloader talk from earlier: I had issues updating a box at work to windows 10, and again to windows 10 anniversary edition, both times because the default bootloader was grub. It'd just fail with a random generic garbage error code (thanks, random post on a random forum on page 20 of google results, for the hint). I had to nuke grub with fixmbr or bootrec or what it's called now both times, before it updated successfully.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
OK, OpenBSD is not linux, but I'm not sure where else to ask. OpenBSD uses syslogd daemon for logging. It can be configured to send logs to remote server over tcp. Is there a way to make it log synchronously, i.e. block until message have been accepted by remote server? Yes, I know it's terrible for performance and will break if remote is unavailable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
syslog is designed to be a fire and forget system, I think it even continues to rely on udp for sending over the network. You're probably not going to be able to pull it off. rsyslog probably allows control like you need but don't hold me to it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
xzzy posted:syslog is designed to be a fire and forget system, I think it even continues to rely on udp for sending over the network. You're probably not going to be able to pull it off. quote:Syslog is simplex in nature. It has been observed that implementations of syslog over TCP also do not use any back-channel mechanism to convey information to the transport sender and, consequently, do not use any application-level acknowledgement for syslog signaling from receiver to sender.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Forgall posted:Yeah, I've been reading a bit more Yeah, just sending the basic syslog messages over TCP instead of UDP will not provide strong reliability. If you need that, rsyslog has the option of using the RELP protocol on top of TCP: http://www.rsyslog.com/doc/relp.html That should get you at least close to what you're after.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Truga posted:On the win10 bootloader talk from earlier: I had issues updating a box at work to windows 10, and again to windows 10 anniversary edition, both times because the default bootloader was grub. It'd just fail with a random generic garbage error code (thanks, random post on a random forum on page 20 of google results, for the hint). I had to nuke grub with fixmbr or bootrec or what it's called now both times, before it updated successfully. It's poo poo like this that makes me glad I have defaulted to doing dual-boots on multiple discrete drives rather than partitions whenever possible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
It's poo poo like that that makes me glad I swore off dual-booting years ago and have multiple computers. (now that we have raspberries and nucs it's not a bad way to go)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
xzzy posted:It's poo poo like that that makes me glad I swore off dual-booting years ago and have multiple computers. Meh, I have multiple computers but have set up my desktop computers as dual-boots since the days of Mandrake 9 or so. I also make lots of use of legacy hardware because I am old, worked in the refurbishing industry, and have hoarder tendencies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
I was a moderate hoarder until earlier this year when I realized I was never going to use all that poo poo ever again. Feels good man.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
CaptainSarcastic posted:It's poo poo like this that makes me glad I have defaulted to doing dual-boots on multiple discrete drives rather than partitions whenever possible. This will still get eaten unless you actually change the boot order in BIOS. EFI is much more graceful, and "Windows ate grub" can be fixed in about 30 seconds just from the firmware menus, no need for a liveusb or anything
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
I did a kernel update with "apt-get dist-upgrade" last night in Ubuntu and I now have two entries in grub for Windows bootloader. Two separate SSD's: one just containing Ubuntu, one just containing Windows 10. I don't have any boot problems, just saying that grub isn't immune from getting confused about boot selection either. I rebooted into Windows to play a game after the update, so I haven't booted Ubuntu yet, but I'm confident it'll be OK.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
telcoM posted:You seem to have 2 GPT partitioned disks. Both of those have an EFI System Partition (ESP). The weird thing is that bit on the disk hasn't existed for a while. Like, I wiped that entire disk! I ended up adding the stuff to the efibootmgr, and that didn't end up helping at all either. Now I guess I'll just try removing the new hard drive and hope it fixes itself, if not I guess I'll risk bricking my laptop. E: Welp, that didn't fix it. There's no way to get like, GRUB up and running or something instead is there? like setting up a new boot partition with all that set up? Or anything? I'm kind of worried about deleting everything because given how it's been it feels like nothing is really gonna work all that well. everythingWasBees fucked around with this message at 07:55 on Dec 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
everythingWasBees posted:The weird thing is that bit on the disk hasn't existed for a while. Like, I wiped that entire disk! EE: Also, the lack of option to get into the BIOS is kind of worrying. (Post is not edit.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 08:06
|
|
|
I've been getting into the habit of hitting F11 to fullscreen things (like Terminal, Firefox, etc) in Gnome3/X11 cause it looks nicer without all the extra menu and status bars. I also really like being able to drag firefox to the left/right side of the screen and have it snap in half of the screen, but this doesn't let me hide the status bars and such. If I want to be able to do that does it sound like a tiling window manager is my cup of tea? Which one should I try and what's the easiest way to try one (easiest as in lets me revert back to my current desktop environment exactly as it is in case I don't like it)? e: I'm cleaning out/going through my dotfiles and I have umask set to 0022 which seems to be the default. Is there any reason why 0027 isn't the standard default? It seems like it would make more sense because why should "others" be allowed to read your files? Boris Galerkin fucked around with this message at 14:34 on Dec 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 13:41
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:I've been getting into the habit of hitting F11 to fullscreen things (like Terminal, Firefox, etc) in Gnome3/X11 cause it looks nicer without all the extra menu and status bars. I also really like being able to drag firefox to the left/right side of the screen and have it snap in half of the screen, but this doesn't let me hide the status bars and such. If I want to be able to do that does it sound like a tiling window manager is my cup of tea? Which one should I try and what's the easiest way to try one (easiest as in lets me revert back to my current desktop environment exactly as it is in case I don't like it)? i3 is very easy to use by tiling wm standards and the tabbed mode is real nice for full-screen use (I like to juggle loads of browser windows by "topic", so nothing else comes close for my kind of workflow), give it a try and see if it works for you. Some GUI programs dislike being in anything but floating mode and end up sort-of mangled, so I guess it depends on your general software preferences how well it'll work. I rarely ever run any non-fullscreen programs besides Firefox/Chromium and urxvt.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Keito posted:i3 is very easy to use by tiling wm standards and the tabbed mode is real nice for full-screen use (I like to juggle loads of browser windows by "topic", so nothing else comes close for my kind of workflow), give it a try and see if it works for you. Is there a 'fallback mode' for when things like this happen?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Is there a 'fallback mode' for when things like this happen? Basically. You have a float mode that can be toggled on a per window basis (super+shift+space by default), and you can configure certain programs to always start in floating.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
apropos man posted:I did a kernel update with "apt-get dist-upgrade" last night in Ubuntu and I now have two entries in grub for Windows bootloader. Two separate SSD's: one just containing Ubuntu, one just containing Windows 10. Following on from my earlier post: I just got in from my last shift at work (Merry Christmas everyone!) and decided to boot Windows for a bit of a gaming session. Noticed that one of the grub entries for Windows was /dev/sdc and remembered why: I had very specifically cloned sda (Windows) to sdc (blank mechanical drive) a few days ago, for the sole purpose of trying to run a game on an old Nehalem/Clarkdale i3 (Elite Dangerous, it worked!). I never needed to use the cloned drive because I did a full reinstall. I'd forgotten sdc was now a Windows drive, so when I did the kernel update, naturally update-grub picked up on the second Windows installation and added it to the boot menu. It was my fault, not grub's, and I thought I'd share how dunderheaded I am. :-o
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Is there a 'fallback mode' for when things like this happen? No. Tiling WMs mostly rely on identifying the window class. Unless you have a rule saying that VLC (or whatever) should float, it tiles everything by default, including dialog windows for some applications. apropos man posted:I did a kernel update with "apt-get dist-upgrade" last night in Ubuntu and I now have two entries in grub for Windows bootloader. Two separate SSD's: one just containing Ubuntu, one just containing Windows 10. grub2 scans using /etc/grub.d/10-osprober It may be grub2.d on Ubuntu. Something probably went wrong there. Do you have 2 EFI system partitions for some reason? Did Windows shove a loader into /boot/EFI/Windows on your Ubuntu ESP? Maybe. You can see what happens by running grub2-mkconfig yourself. everythingWasBees posted:The weird thing is that bit on the disk hasn't existed for a while. Like, I wiped that entire disk! EFI boot order is kept in firmware. It doesn't care whether the disk is physically present, as long as it was added whenever you had Ubuntu installed. Well-behaved EFI utilities don't remove efivars they didn't create. Honestly, try pulling the battery from the mainboard, waiting 5 min, then put it back in. This is probably what I'd do. You can install grub2 and set that as the default to see if it initializes video. systemd-boot is still working (your system isn't booting magically), but you appear to have no video. Have you tried blindly selecting Windows?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
evol262 posted:grub2 scans using /etc/grub.d/10-osprober Yeah, as you can see from my updated post, I had forgotten that I'd used "dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/sdc" to clone my Windows SSD onto a spare mechanical drive that was still plugged into the machine at the time of the kernel upgrade. Therefore, when update-grub was triggered at the end of the kernel upgrade it saw two identical partitioning setups and added them both to grub. I initially blamed grub until I realised it was my own forgetfulness. I've nuked /dev/sdc by giving it a blank GPT. I had only cloned it in case I needed to move it to a test rig I was building the other day, but in the end I didn't need it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
apropos man posted:Do have a go at this: It booted and didn't redline my CPU or use up all my memory sitting on the desktop, but it didn't see the laptop's sound hardware, and I couldn't see any option to install the OS to the hard drive. The functionality was probably in there somewhere and I was too awful a Linux user to find it, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 04:33
|
|