mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

a very small Live CD shaped to look and act like Puppy Linux.

Moderator: fredx181

Post Reply
dcung
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:31 am
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 51 times

mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by dcung »

I have been using same laptop with most SSD spare space to make sets of ISOs collection.
I refreshed Bullseye, Bookworm, Daedalus sets yesterday.

I noticed something 'odd' during boot time. I presume that it happens on all of the build that I made yesterday, but I only tested about 6-8 of them (out of 30 or so ISOs). Only tested DDog, Jwm DE of Bullseye, Bookworm, Daedalus.

During boot time, it displayed 'wrong' kernel filename.
k-5.10.0-26-amd64.squashfs
k-6.1.0-15-amd64.squashfs

Functionally, they are working okay. Conky displayed correct kernel used too.

Anyone else notice this? or is it just my builds went wrong?

Another question - where can you find booting logs showing the screenshot? I looked in /var/log but could not find such info. This would save me taking fotos if I knew where to find the logs.

bullseye-ddog.jpg
bullseye-ddog.jpg (138.77 KiB) Viewed 1003 times

.
.

bookworm-ddog.jpg
bookworm-ddog.jpg (208.92 KiB) Viewed 1003 times
dcung
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:31 am
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by dcung »

Is it related to this?

viewtopic.php?p=102681#p102681

So, with new build - I could not tell during boot time now due to truncation.
k-5.10.0-25-amd64.squashfs
k-5.10.0-26-amd64.squashfs
k-5.10.0-2x-amd64.squashfs

k-6.1.0-14-amd64.squashfs
k-6.1.0-15-amd64.squashfs
k-6.1.0-1x-amd64.squashfs

FYI - when I tried to rename kernel file to (I usually do this after nvidia driver update remaster - have not tested remaster yet)
00-k-5.10.0-26-amd64.squashfs

it displayed/complained some message about file numbering, etc, etc...but too fast for me without taking another foto.

dcung
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:31 am
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by dcung »

Having read the whole thread, I know now that what I saw as 'odd' was related to this.
viewtopic.php?t=9736

Not sure that I like the change.
As in my frugal installation, unlike trister, I don't use many squashfs files.
The mklive default build, only has 2 squashfs files. I need no where near 100-140 squashfs files.

Now, at boot time, I find that I could not tell the exact kernel files due to truncation to accommodate that.

I have many frugal installations and it's nice to know what kernel files used during boot time.
So, I know which to update as it boots.

I guess, ultimately it is Fred's call.

User avatar
fredx181
Posts: 2648
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:49 pm
Location: holland
Has thanked: 293 times
Been thanked: 1041 times
Contact:

Re: mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by fredx181 »

dcung wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2023 5:22 am

Having read the whole thread, I know now that what I saw as 'odd' was related to this.
viewtopic.php?t=9736

Not sure that I like the change.
As in my frugal installation, unlike trister, I don't use many squashfs files.
The mklive default build, only has 2 squashfs files. I need no where near 100-140 squashfs files.

Now, at boot time, I find that I could not tell the exact kernel files due to truncation to accommodate that.

I have many frugal installations and it's nice to know what kernel files used during boot time.
So, I know which to update as it boots.

I guess, ultimately it is Fred's call.

Thanks, I will reconsider changing it, wanted to accommodate @trister's request and as it's indeed just a cosmetic change (as far as tested) I thought it couldn't do any harm.

User avatar
fredx181
Posts: 2648
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:49 pm
Location: holland
Has thanked: 293 times
Been thanked: 1041 times
Contact:

Re: mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by fredx181 »

@dcung Question:
I can easily change it so that the full .squashfs names are displayed at boot, but still the mountpoint names (in /mnt/live/memory/images) are truncated.
Would that be OK for you ?

dcung
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:31 am
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by dcung »

fredx181 wrote: Wed Dec 13, 2023 12:58 pm

@dcung Question:
I can easily change it so that the full .squashfs names are displayed at boot, but still the mountpoint names (in /mnt/live/memory/images) are truncated.
Would that be OK for you ?

That would be good, since I think the kernel squashfs file fullname provides useful info.

Hope that is easy modification. If it will take you too much effort, I can live with either.
Thanks Fred.

User avatar
fredx181
Posts: 2648
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:49 pm
Location: holland
Has thanked: 293 times
Been thanked: 1041 times
Contact:

Re: mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by fredx181 »

@dcung Yes, easy modification, did just one line edit, (like echo <fullname>.squashfs , really a cosmetic change only), so now when making new Bullseye, Bookworm or Sid build it will show full .squashfs names at boot (and as I said, the module mountpoints will still have the truncated names (as @trister requested)).

Also upgraded package "upgrade-kernel" (v1.14 now) reflecting this change.
For an existing build: If you want to create new initrd1.xz, install this new upgrade-kernel package and run the script '/usr/local/cr-initrd/mkinitrd' (part of upgrade-kernel package) from terminal .

Thanks again for your comment, I also like it much more with the full .squashfs names showing at boot.

dcung
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:31 am
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by dcung »

@fredx181
I just made a couple of Bullseye iso.
The full .squashfs names showing at boot now.

Thanks Fred! :thumbup:

trister
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:52 am
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by trister »

Very good job fred :)

I would just like to add a note here.
The problem was not the number of the squashfs files. It was the sum of their characters.
The same problem can occur even with just a few files with big filenames.. That is why I believe that this internal renaming works
To make things worse ,the error it produces doesn't help at all at determining the real problem.

User avatar
fredx181
Posts: 2648
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:49 pm
Location: holland
Has thanked: 293 times
Been thanked: 1041 times
Contact:

Re: mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by fredx181 »

trister wrote: Thu Dec 14, 2023 4:37 pm

Very good job fred :)

I would just like to add a note here.
The problem was not the number of the squashfs files. It was the sum of their characters.
The same problem can occur even with just a few files with big filenames.. That is why I believe that this internal renaming works
To make things worse ,the error it produces doesn't help at all at determining the real problem.

Yeah, sum of their characters, right.
I don't understand what exactly you mean by (i.e. not sure if you still see a problem or not ?):

To make things worse ,the error it produces doesn't help at all at determining the real problem.

dcung
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:31 am
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by dcung »

@fredx181

FYI - I tested latest Bullseye DDog build on one of my PC that has nvidia GTX670.
After installing nvidia driver and other customisation, I make a remaster as I usually do.
Remaster works fine. :thumbup:

Only thing I noticed is that the popup message showed truncated kernel filename.
No biggies. I just thought to report.

2023-12-17-131806_660x182_scrot.png
2023-12-17-131806_660x182_scrot.png (32.49 KiB) Viewed 739 times
trister
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:52 am
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: mklive - 'cosmetic' issue?

Post by trister »

Sorry for late responce.

fredx181 wrote: Thu Dec 14, 2023 5:40 pm
trister wrote: Thu Dec 14, 2023 4:37 pm

Very good job fred :)

I would just like to add a note here.
The problem was not the number of the squashfs files. It was the sum of their characters.
The same problem can occur even with just a few files with big filenames.. That is why I believe that this internal renaming works
To make things worse ,the error it produces doesn't help at all at determining the real problem.

Yeah, sum of their characters, right.

I mean that if you have 3 files with names :1.squashfs , 2.squashfs , 3.squashfs they have the same result in this issue as a single filename with the name : 123456789123456789012.squashfs

fredx181 wrote: Thu Dec 14, 2023 5:40 pm

I don't understand what exactly you mean by (i.e. not sure if you still see a problem or not ?):

To make things worse ,the error it produces doesn't help at all at determining the real problem.

The problem is fixed with your modifications.
What I meant was that if someone didn't use the "truncated" names then when his filenames reach the maximum supported length his system will stop working without giving any clues.

Post Reply

Return to “DebianDogs”