newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

phil_n · 2017-06-29 07:13:09

Hi all.
I've been trying to use devuan. First attempt installed OK but gave up trying to get wifi to work. This time I used netinst - it worked but when I tried to run it, it said "get a newer version of e2fsck" among other things. I then get a command line "maintenance" shell.
Anybody have any idea of what I need to do now?
TIA
phil_n

Last edited by phil_n (2017-06-30 15:51:51)

fsmithred · 2017-06-29 13:07:55

You're getting messages to upgrade e2fsck when you run the installer? Which installer iso and installation method are you using?

If you can get back to the installation that worked but didn't have wifi, that's a known problem and is pretty easy to fix.

phil_n · 2017-06-29 13:18:38

No - the installer seemed to work fine - it's after it's all done and I try to start it from the grub menu. (The other entries work fine - I'm posting this from the Mint install.)
The wifi problem install is on another machine that I'm not using right now so it's not a worry yet.

fsmithred · 2017-06-29 13:34:43

Does it say what version of fsck it's using? Make sure it's the version in devuan and not the version in mint. Make sure the grub menu entry is pointing to the correct root.

phil_n · 2017-06-29 13:58:54

Seems to be pointing to the correct root (/dev/hda9 or hd0,msdos9). There are other entries for Devuan under advanced options - I'll try those and get back later. Thanks.

phil_n · 2017-06-29 15:17:19

Tried the Devuan "system V" option from grub - same thing.

fsck version in Devuan shows 1.42.12 - Mint has 1.42.13. Trying to run fsck on hda9 from Mint gives me same error:

e2fsck 1.42.13 (17-May-2015)
/dev/sda9 has unsupported feature(s): metadata_csum
e2fsck: Get a newer version of e2fsck!

Just a thought - I re-partitioned the drive beforehand with gparted on the gparted live cd before running the installer - maybe something to do with that?

FWIW the box is an HP Pavilion g6 and I used the net installer.

fsmithred · 2017-06-29 19:40:39

Maybe. Seems like a good guess, anyway. Did you let the installer format the partition again?

Here's the top hit on a search for your error message. Looks like it might be related.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=213125

phil_n · 2017-06-30 00:38:28

No. Just for laughs (strange sense of humor) I'm going to try the whole thing over again and let the installer handle the partition. I'll be back.

phil_n · 2017-06-30 15:50:38

FWIW Deleted partition from with gparted in Mint; ran same devuan net-install; let installer handle partitioning; now I'm posting this from Devuan. No problems, no errors. duh. Linux - not for the faint hearted.

fungus · 2017-07-13 17:44:49

This is odd!
I had an identical experience. The installer run flowlessly and I thought it was going to be 1st run 1st hit.
Weird fsck action. Although it said there were no errors it said the root system is read only. Then the fsck installed
by dev1 said I needed a newer copy of ef2fsck .... but without a net connection either in live or while booting
how would it know there is a newer one?
My hidden wifi point couldn't be discovered by Wicd in live. I thought after the installation I would figure it out.
I also run fsck from a debian installation on the same partition, no problems.

Yes, I too, had the partition for the installation done before the installer. Just plenty of space of a new ext4 partition.
Why would the installer's partitioner work any better? I would like to figure why before I try again.
And I thought this was the best installer I've seen in Linux yet. I jinxed it!

I noticed that the grub installation took way longer than I thought it should. So I was expecting to find something weird there. Well, there was. It found its own installation and an Arch based installation, it did not see two other Debian installations. The Arch-based grub entry did not work, as expected, they have custom modified their boot configuration and only their own grub will work (or copying and pasting from their grub to other grubs works, so no problem there). The debian installations are debian-based distros. All versions of grub tried before have been able to locate them and make valid boot entries.

fungus · 2017-07-13 23:10:27

UPdate:
No fix I researched worked so I went back and reinstalled. Pretended it needed
repartitioning, opened gparted from the installer, deleted and recreated the partition,
gave it a new label, and proceeded.
All worked just like the last time, only now it boots up. And, grub did find all systems installed. ???
Now I went in, updated and upgraded.
New weird thing, when I added the backports repository, a whole bunch of new stuff
got upgraded.

Added openbox/LXDE on top of the xfce. Things were working well, threw some pkgs away and added some things. Configured the desktop, some. The graphic quality I was not that happy with. Wondered whether lightdm might work better as I have been happy with how it worked elsewhere.

Rebooted, and logged in to the user account with lxde.
Black screen - mouse pointed and that's it.
Hard-reboot, created a new user, logged in with root, everything fine, logged in with new user (little lag till it created all the home files) still ok.

Then relogged in 1st user with openbox. Tried some of the lx desktop configuration/appearance stuff to see if there is the culprit there.
lxsession locks up.

Otherwise it seems fine. A little tuning and searching the logs and it will be
great.

Free at last, from systemd

Good work guys and gals

golinux · 2017-07-13 23:41:09

fungus wrote:

New weird thing, when I added the backports repository, a whole bunch of new stuff
got upgraded.

What else would you expect if you leave backports enabled? Backports are generally used only to acquire specific packages for newer hardware. The rest of the time it is recommended to comment it out. Upgrading everything in backports can have disastrous consequences. You're lucky if everything still works OK.

fungus · 2017-07-14 17:54:16

I did not know that this is the role of backports, I thought it was for speeding up the process from receiving critical updates from testing to stable.

Anyway, I took your criticism and turned it into advice. I disabled backports and switched from stable to ascii. It took a while but it was worth it. Minor problems only, as packages that were already installed vanished in the ascii. I upgraded apt and dpkg and then run dist-upgrade.

Weird things happened again, as some ceres repository was added in my sources. Why would this be added on top of the ascii sources? It was obvious that it was automatically added as the rest of the repositories were using an "alternative" transport and the ceres entry was http. I disabled it and reupdated. Weird things going on with sudoers list, somehow my account which was in sudo since installation would not be able to act as sudo.
So much was done through the root which I don't like doing. Both the first account that would freeze the system and the second account which logged in fine after the backports upgrade, were functional with LXDE.

No errors on X0og.log but I have a suspicion the problem was adjiusting lxde desktop preferences based on Xofc stuff that may not be compatible, In all other distros Lxde coincided with Xfce there were no mixups. I think this requires some checking.

Anyway, it was a rough start but I am willing to ride it as I think it is well worth the trip. Definitely in both openbox and LXDE this system is light (lighter than some unmentionable system) in resources. I still find something substandard about graphics. I couldn't find anythin of i915 in the repositories as the misc-non-free-intel-firmware and X11 related drivers. This is what I suspect is responsible for the sluggish and lower quality graphics, but I am not sure.

The officially official Devuan Forum!

#1 2017-06-29 07:13:09

newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#2 2017-06-29 13:07:55

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#3 2017-06-29 13:18:38

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#4 2017-06-29 13:34:43

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#5 2017-06-29 13:58:54

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#6 2017-06-29 15:17:19

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#7 2017-06-29 19:40:39

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#8 2017-06-30 00:38:28

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#9 2017-06-30 15:50:38

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#10 2017-07-13 17:44:49

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#11 2017-07-13 23:10:27

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#12 2017-07-13 23:41:09

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

#13 2017-07-14 17:54:16

Re: newer version of e2fsck [SOLVED]

Board footer