Kubuntu boots to permanent black/blank screen

[shiftylookingcow]

Kubuntu boots to permanent black/blank screen

So I'm an idiot, but here's what the deal is:

I was running kubuntu 13.04, with the 3.9.0, dual-boot with windows, kde 4.10.2 and everything was fine.

Then I saw that kde 4.10.3 was released, and wondered if I had to do anything to update.

I read this: http://www.kubuntuforums.net/showthr...666-Kde-4-10-3

went here https://launchpad.net/~kubuntu-ppa and ended up adding,

Kubuntu Backports
Kubuntu Beta Backports
Kubuntu Updates

which was dumb because I didn't really know what I was doing and probably misunderstood the post. Anyway after I did that I updated software through muon and carried on as normal. I got an error about the beta ppa so I removed it.

The next time I went to boot kubuntu, nothing but a black screen forever. No keystroke can even bring up a terminal.

When I try to boot other kernels from the advanced options menu in grub, boot hangs at "loading initial ramdisk"


--------------------------

Other info


Type- Desktop
CPU - intel core i5 ivy
GPU - amd radeon 7870
RAM - 16 GB
HDs - 1 SDD (where / is) and 1 HDD

[Frank616]

shiftylookingcow:

I read this: http://www.kubuntuforums.net/showthr...666-Kde-4-10-3

I see that this link is broken. You may be victim of some bad advice.

How much do you have invested in this install? Can you revert to a regular Windows desktop, removing the Kubuntu install totally?

There is a major danger in dual booting. Most of the time, Linux runs fine with Windows. As long as you are using stable releases. However, if you are using beta software, you better have a full backup. I have a swappable system drive on my desktop machine. I only use that for experimenting with new installs, most recently, Mint 14. Therefore, there is no risk to my base install. On a laptop, I just pull the original disk altogether, and install another.

If you need help restoring the Windows partition to its previous state, removing the beta Kubuntu software completely, post back here. Once that is done, you can try again, but more safely.

Frank.

[shiftylookingcow]

I think the link should work now.

My windows installation is fine btw, I get to grub as normal, and If I pick windows, it's all god. My issue is only when I try to boot kubuntu.

I don't have much invested in this install at all, I only just made it about a week ago. i'll probably end up formatting my linux partitions and just starting over.

I'm just miffed that all I did was add some repositories and that has completely stopped booting altogether, and I have no idea where the problem is/ what I broke. I wanted to try to salvage this installation as a learning experience. I don't want to believe the linux really has to be this fragile, as I really don't think I did anything all that wacky. Yet, boom it seems to be totally dead, with seemingly no way to even diagnose what happened. Booting different kernels doesn't help, adding nomodeset doesn't help. I'm at loss.

I mean how does this even happen? What is the computer doing when i try to boot?

[Frank616]

shiftylookingcow

I'm just miffed that all I did was add some repositories and that has completely stopped booting altogether,

IIUC, you added beta repositories.

I don't want to believe the linux really has to be this fragile

It isn't. Please remember as well that Windows more or less comes with 'training wheels', and Apple devices with straight jackets. There is not a lot that the user can do (ordinarily) to mess things up. Linux gives you much more freedom, including the freedom to shoot yourself in the foot if you so choose.

I am not a Linux guru. I've just learned that nothing is perfect, and that backups are a great idea. Perhaps someone else can help you repair it as a learning exercise. However, unless you have your Windows install backed up, don't tempt fate with cutting edge beta software. You are just asking for trouble no matter what you install it on. Then, sadly, Linux gets blamed for 'trashing' a machine, when all it really did was give the user the ability to trash their own machine.

Beta releases are experimental software, and should be considered as such. Have you ever had a Windows upgrade go awry? Here is one. Here is another.

FWIW, Linux will run very well on older hardware. Do you have a second machine somewhere? Why not experiment on that? Heck, I run Kubuntu 12.04 on a Dell C840 laptop, and it works fine. Try putting Win7 on that!

Frank.

[SteveRiley]

Don't try to use Win7 DLL's on XP.

That's an unfair comparison, Frank. Backports are not like this at all. They are packages that have been modified to work with older libraries, have had their dependencies adjusted accordingly, and have been tested. While they aren't risk-free, they are generally stable enough for daily use.

But yeah, using the beta and Ninja repositories can get you into trouble, that's true.

[Frank616]

Steve:

Backports are not like this at all. They are packages that have been modified to work with older libraries, have had their dependencies adjusted accordingly, and have been tested. While they aren't risk-free, they are generally stable enough for daily use.

Then I will retract that statement. However, I also know that there are reports here of users having issues upgrading KDE on 12.04 by using the backports repository.

The point I was trying to make is that if one wants stability, then one should stick with stable releases. Am I not right that the more one mixes bits and pieces, the harder it is to maintain that stability?

I kind of thought your link make that point, even if my example was overstated.

Frank.

[SteveRiley]

there are reports here of users having issues upgrading KDE on 12.04 by using the backports repository.

My suspicion is that these result from a combination of edge-case hardware mixes, complex configurations, and poor system hygiene. I've been using backports on every *buntu release since I started in 2009, with 9.04 (Karmic), on ThinkPads and ThinkStations of varying vintages. Not once have I experienced an issue whose cause was backport-related.

The point I was trying to make is that if one wants stability, then one should stick with stable releases. Am I not right that the more one mixes bits and pieces, the harder it is to maintain that stability?

You're right. If stability is one's primary goal, then Debian Stable is probably the best choice! Then, in decreasing order of stability, one could choose Debian Testing, Debian+Backports, Debian Unstable, Ubuntu, Ubuntu+Backports.

I kind of thought your link make that point, even if my example was overstated.

But even Ubuntu+Backports is going to be more stable than XCOPYing a bunch of Windows 7 DLLs onto XP. That is guaranteed to drive you to drink!

[Frank616]

Steve:

OK, you got me. I edited my post.

I guess I got wound up a bit. In another forum in a far away land where I am a sysop, we have a user that experiments well beyond their skill level, then blames the OS for the problems, including totally trashing their Windows install -- twice. That irks me. I guess I let that show. My apologies to all of you.

Frank.

[SteveRiley]

we have a user that experiments well beyond their skill level, then blames the OS for the problems, including totally trashing their Windows install -- twice. That irks me. I guess I let that show. May apologies to all of you.

It's cool, Frank. No apologies needed. I like your edits..."training wheels" and "straight jackets," LOL

[shiftylookingcow]

IIUC, you added beta repositories.

The beta repositories didn't actually apply any changes, as there was some error. Point taken though, I need to adjust my definition of beta. I always use beta software on windows just to be on the cutting edge and for things like browsers and such i've never had the slightest issue.

Linu

x gives you much more freedom, including the freedom to shoot yourself in the foot if you so choose.

While I understand your sentiment with the "training wheels" comment, I would just say I'm not frustrated I broke my installation (yes I did). What I am frustrated with is that I got it to state where it literally seems unrepairable and undiagnosable.

Also I boot from an ssd and have all my windows files/stuff I care about in its own partition on an hdd. I wouldn't be mucking around with the newest version of kubuntu even if I cared too too much about stability.

[Frank616]

shiftylookingcow:

OK, understood.

As to finding out what happened, I guess it would be possible to sleuth it out. As I said, however, I am no Linux guru, and it gives me the willies to try to fix a broken install on a production machine. You might be able to fix it, but it is also possible to make it worse. My tendency would be to return the machine to its pre-Linux state if the Windows partition is of value to you, then experiment on a spare machine, or pull the Windows disk for another, and experiment on that. But that's just me. I stopped using Windows with Win98, and all my Linux machines (other than the C840) are daily workers for me. I have a swappable hard drive in my desktop, and I use that for experimenting.

So, is what you have on the Windows partition of value to you? Lets start with that question.

Frank.

[Ambos]

I Had this problem of a blank screen after a fresh install. All I changed was an install of firefox then rebooted, left with a blank screen and a cursor. Control Alt and Delete let me log out and I could log in as a guest no problem. But when I log in as myself it lands me with a blank screen and a cursor. Strange??