Strange init respawning problems

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I have run into an interesting problem. I have a Sony Vaio PCG-F480 laptop
that was happily running Redhat 9 until i came home this evening to see
not only was there 4 updates available (new kernel rpms) from this morning
that i had seen before loeaving for work, but there was an httpd and
mod_ssl update. I thought, kewl, i will ncftp down all the latest rpms and
do the updates...well the downloads went well, good speed, but i found
there was 6 additional files in i386 that came down (glibc rpms) that i
didnt notice on the rhn-applet notification. So since i had already
grabbed them, i installed them as well. So, i decided to reboot, and when
the machine came back up, it loaded the kernel ok, but when it went to go
into init 5, it gave the following message:

INIT: Entering runlevel: 5
INIT: Id "1" respawning too fast: disabled for 5 minutes
INIT: Id "2" respawning too fast: disabled for 5 minutes
INIT: Id "3" respawning too fast: disabled for 5 minutes
INIT: Id "4" respawning too fast: disabled for 5 minutes
INIT: Id "5" respawning too fast: disabled for 5 minutes
INIT: Id "6" respawning too fast: disabled for 5 minutes
INIT: Id "x" respawning too fast: disabled for 5 minutes
INIT: no more processes left in this runlevel

My thoughts were, this resulted from the glibc rpm installs, and i needed
to roll-back the glibc rpms to the last working version, however i am
unsure the best approach to do this. I can bring the machine up using the
survival cd, and can get the root and / partitions mounted, but under
/mnt/ so i am sure RPM would fail at that point. Can someone give me a
pointer or two here as to how i can (re)mount these partitions so as to do
a roll-back of an rpm?!? Maybe i am not using the survival cd properly, as
it does present a choice of how to mount the partitions (i.e. read-only,
read-write, chroot, and not at all). In read-write mode i end up initially
with /var/mnt/boot and /var/mnt/rootfs. Or is there ANY other way to fix
this problem? I have never seen a machine do this before, and it rather
startled me...lol

ANY help would be greatly appreciated. Other than the above issue, i have
loved Redhat 9 on the laptop, installed and runs quite well, and looks
very nice.
-- 
Michael B. Weiner, Linux+, Linux+ SME
Systems Administrator/Partner
The UserFriendly Network (UFN)

Linux Registered User #94900	Have you been counted? http://counter.li.org


-----------------------------------------
This email was sent using SquirrelMail.
   "Webmail for nuts!"
http://squirrelmail.org/


Random Thought:
--------------






[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Centos Users]     [Kernel Development]     [Red Hat Install]     [Red Hat Watch]     [Red Hat Development]     [Red Hat Phoebe Beta]     [Yosemite Forum]     [Fedora Discussion]     [Gimp]     [Stuff]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux