No output in Arch Linux initcpio after 1.6.6 #19

New Issue

Closed

opened 2022-05-29 14:17:13 +00:00 by a-j-wood · 4 comments

a-j-wood commented

2022-05-29 14:17:13 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Correspondence summary:

hi,

here are two screenshots : no change with the additional parameters (I used /dev/urandom instead of /dev/zero).

the tests are here done with qemu but the operation is identical with a
real machine.
qemu -kernel archkernel -initrd myinitcpio.pv.1.6.20
qemu -kernel archkernel -initrd myinitcpio.pv.1.6.6
regards, lacsaP.

Le lun. 31 janv. 2022 à 23:32, Andrew Wood a écrit :

Hello, thanks for your email.

Do you know what happens if you use "-f" with pv in this case?

Also does "-L 500" make any difference?

Wondering if either terminal detection or rate of output changes the
outcome.

Sent from: lacsaP

hi,
have a look here : https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/73393
regards, lacsaP.

Correspondence summary: hi, here are two screenshots : no change with the additional parameters (I used /dev/urandom instead of /dev/zero). ![2022 02 01-10 39 48](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/89565849/170873750-1f7f2fde-122b-4232-8104-55dded797574.png) ![2022 02 01-10 43 26](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/89565849/170873753-4ffbdbe0-d29f-454a-bf34-c4027d700ddd.png) the tests are here done with qemu but the operation is identical with a real machine. qemu -kernel archkernel -initrd myinitcpio.pv.1.6.20 qemu -kernel archkernel -initrd myinitcpio.pv.1.6.6 regards, lacsaP. Le lun. 31 janv. 2022 à 23:32, Andrew Wood a écrit : > Hello, thanks for your email. > > Do you know what happens if you use "-f" with pv in this case? > > Also does "-L 500" make any difference? > > Wondering if either terminal detection or rate of output changes the > outcome. > > > Sent from: lacsaP > > > > hi, > > have a look here : https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/73393 > > regards, lacsaP.

patatetom commented

2023-03-02 12:56:10 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

hi,

a small remark on this subject:
the use of pv is done very early in the initrd and /dev/stderr is not available at that time (archlinux).
I realized this in one of my scripts that did not display in the console the error message sent to /dev/stderr (the file /dev/stderr was created instead, so no error was reported).
on the other hand, the redirection to fd#2 works.

# uname -r 
5.10.83-1-lts
# echo test >/dev/stderr #KO
# cat /dev/stderr
test
# echo test >&2 #OK
test

regards, lacsaP.

hi, a small remark on this subject: the use of `pv` is done very early in the initrd and `/dev/stderr` is not available at that time (archlinux). I realized this in one of my scripts that did not display in the console the error message sent to `/dev/stderr` (the file `/dev/stderr` was created instead, so no error was reported). on the other hand, the redirection to fd#2 works. ``` # uname -r 5.10.83-1-lts # echo test >/dev/stderr #KO # cat /dev/stderr test # echo test >&2 #OK test ``` regards, lacsaP.

patatetom commented

2023-03-23 11:36:17 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

hi,

archlinux has reintroduced /dev/stderr and the problem persists with the latest versions of pv.

a change introduced after version 1.6.6 is probably at the origin of this strange behavior... (because version 1.6.20 works perfectly in the final system).

regards, lacsaP.

hi, archlinux has reintroduced `/dev/stderr` and the problem persists with the latest versions of `pv`. a change introduced after version 1.6.6 is probably at the origin of this strange behavior... (because version 1.6.20 works perfectly in the final system). regards, lacsaP.

a-j-wood commented

2023-07-16 00:06:04 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

A fix for this has been suggested, and has been merged in. It will be in the next release.

patatetom commented

2023-07-17 06:54:10 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

thanks a lot