Re: Another issue with install and GPT
On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 22:21 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 04:50 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > > > Anaconda is installing the mbr on the usb and with cd it still tries to > > install the mbr on the relevant media nor really hard to understand all > > blocker results. > > What's hard to understand is that I can't duplicate that result: I've > done a net install from the disc image and not seen it try to write the > bootloader to the CD drive. I can't think of anything that would cause > anaconda to do that. AFAIK it's not possible for it to consider an > optical drive a valid install target. If this was a general result, > Alpha would never have gone out... When you got to the 'where do you want to install the bootloader screen', what did it say, exactly? (Especially in the CD test case). -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Another issue with install and GPT
On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 05:01 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 09/18/2011 03:41 AM, Red Hat wrote: > > I'm confused by this result, I don't know of any reason why a > > straightforward net install from a disc would fail. What did you do > > exactly? > > Beside the point that anaconda is frelled when it comes to grub2 and > mbr, did you frelled up your local mailer install or are you "Red Hat" > now =) Bad config in my webmail, I was typing that on someone else's tablet...=) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Another issue with install and GPT
On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 04:50 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > Anaconda is installing the mbr on the usb and with cd it still tries to > install the mbr on the relevant media nor really hard to understand all > blocker results. What's hard to understand is that I can't duplicate that result: I've done a net install from the disc image and not seen it try to write the bootloader to the CD drive. I can't think of anything that would cause anaconda to do that. AFAIK it's not possible for it to consider an optical drive a valid install target. If this was a general result, Alpha would never have gone out... > What is failing is the mbr record so the question remains here how > prepared is anaconda for grub2. That's a vague question: in some sense, of course it's 'prepared', how else would any F16 install we've done at all have worked? They all use grub 2 (except EFI). Are there bugs? probably. So, why ask the question? The important bit is, let's work out what the bugs are. I'll re-test a net install and see what happens. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Another issue with install and GPT
On 09/18/2011 03:41 AM, Red Hat wrote: > I'm confused by this result, I don't know of any reason why a > straightforward net install from a disc would fail. What did you do > exactly? Beside the point that anaconda is frelled when it comes to grub2 and mbr, did you frelled up your local mailer install or are you "Red Hat" now =) JBG -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Another issue with install and GPT
On 09/18/2011 03:41 AM, Red Hat wrote: > On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 23:08:51 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: >> On 09/17/2011 06:55 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >>> On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 07:52 -0400, Scott Robbins wrote: I accidentally sent this through a different address, so I think it's just going to come back to me. If it turns out to be a double post, please forgive me. I'm not sure if this is a bug, or a one time fluke. I don't have time or hardware to do several test installs, but perhaps someone else has experienced it. >>> There is a bug report on a very similar case here: >>> >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738964 >>> >>> it does seem like there may be an issue with the detection of >>> whether a >>> BIOS boot partition is necessary when installing from a USB stick. >>> However, please do verify this with an image written via dd or >>> livecd-iso-to-disk. We do not support unetbootin, as you said. >> Just performed two test of an usb key both created livecd-to-iso >> >> One network install and another one of an usb key it self ( dvd ) >> >> In both the installation process itself went but both times it >> resulted >> in anaconda installing the mbr on the usb key which leaves the user >> with >> unbootable system ( without the key ) and totally unrecovarable ( >> since >> they need to shrink the primary partition to create a mbr partition >> on >> it ) . >> >> JBG > I'm confused by this result, I don't know of any reason why a > straightforward net install from a disc would fail. What did you do > exactly? > I downloaded the netiso ran livecd to usb, performed a net install ( Icelandic keyboard unhased lvm otherwize default next next install ) and the mbr ended being installed on the usb containing the net installed iso resulting in a non bootable system from harddrive Then I downloaded the fullblown dvd ran livecd to usb then performend an the same install and again the mbr ended up being installed on the usb containing the full blown dvd resulting in non bootable system. Then I burned the net install to a cd and then ran the same install again which resulted in a non bootable system ( cd being non writable ). Not complicated not hard to install all valid scenarios all resulting in a non bootable system on hp 620 laptop. Heck after custom partitioning it still resulting in a non bootable system ( which btw all defaulting to wanting to install to the usb ) Basically the installation whent fine and that same installation procedure works fine of F15 Anaconda is installing the mbr on the usb and with cd it still tries to install the mbr on the relevant media nor really hard to understand all blocker results. What is failing is the mbr record so the question remains here how prepared is anaconda for grub2. JBG -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Another issue with install and GPT
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 23:08:51 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: > On 09/17/2011 06:55 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 07:52 -0400, Scott Robbins wrote: >>> I accidentally sent this through a different address, so I think >>> it's >>> just going to come back to me. If it turns out to be a double >>> post, >>> please forgive me. >>> >>> >>> >>> I'm not sure if this is a bug, or a one time fluke. I don't have >>> time >>> or hardware to do several test installs, but perhaps someone else >>> has >>> experienced it. >> There is a bug report on a very similar case here: >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738964 >> >> it does seem like there may be an issue with the detection of >> whether a >> BIOS boot partition is necessary when installing from a USB stick. >> However, please do verify this with an image written via dd or >> livecd-iso-to-disk. We do not support unetbootin, as you said. > > Just performed two test of an usb key both created livecd-to-iso > > One network install and another one of an usb key it self ( dvd ) > > In both the installation process itself went but both times it > resulted > in anaconda installing the mbr on the usb key which leaves the user > with > unbootable system ( without the key ) and totally unrecovarable ( > since > they need to shrink the primary partition to create a mbr partition > on > it ) . > > JBG I'm confused by this result, I don't know of any reason why a straightforward net install from a disc would fail. What did you do exactly? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Fedora 14 updates-testing report
The following Fedora 14 Security updates need testing: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libsoup-2.32.2-2.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/foomatic-4.0.8-3.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/librsvg2-2.32.0-4.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.10-4.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tomcat6-6.0.26-21.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wireshark-1.4.9-1.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/zabbix-1.8.7-2.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/Django-1.3.1-2.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cherokee-1.2.99-1.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/quassel-0.7.3-1.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/qt-4.7.4-2.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openldap-2.4.23-10.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-5.3.8-1.fc14,maniadrive-1.2-32.fc14,php-eaccelerator-0.9.6.1-9.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-2.6.35.14-97.fc14 The following Fedora 14 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-2.6.35.14-97.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lldpad-0.9.41-4.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/librsvg2-2.32.0-4.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.10-4.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/livecd-tools-14.3-1.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/curl-7.21.0-10.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/system-config-users-1.2.110-1.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ModemManager-0.4.998-1.git20110706.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/unique-1.1.6-3.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-savage-2.3.2-3.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mash-0.5.22-1.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/policycoreutils-2.0.85-30.3.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.2.904-8.fc14.2 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-qxl-0.0.21-3.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-nouveau-0.0.16-14.20101010git8c8f15c.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libconcord-0.23-5.fc14,udev-161-9.fc14,concordance-0.23-2.fc14 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openldap-2.4.23-10.fc14 The following builds have been pushed to Fedora 14 updates-testing ding-libs-0.1.3-5.fc14 espeak-1.45.05-1.fc14 gauche-0.9.2-1.fc14 gauche-gl-0.5.1-2.fc14 gauche-gtk-0.6-0.2.20110725git598828842a339.fc14 gpodder-2.19-1.fc14 kernel-2.6.35.14-97.fc14 libguestfs-1.8.13-1.fc14 malaga-suomi-voikko-1.10-1.fc14 olpc-kbdshim-20-1.fc14 plowshare-0.9.4-0.15.20110914git.fc14 python-dateutil-1.5-3.fc14 python-matplotlib-1.0.1-12.fc14 qt-4.7.4-2.fc14 sane-backends-1.0.22-4.fc14 snappy-1.0.4-1.fc14 tinc-1.0.16-1.fc14 Details about builds: ding-libs-0.1.3-5.fc14 (FEDORA-2011-12863) "Ding is not GLib" assorted utility libraries Update Information: Fixes a serious bug in libdhash with very large (> 1024 slots) initial size ChangeLog: * Thu Sep 15 2011 Stephen Gallagher - 0.1.3-5 - New upstream release 0.1.3 - Fixes a serious issue with libdhash and large initial hash sizes * Tue Feb 8 2011 Fedora Release Engineering - 0.1.2-4 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_15_Mass_Rebuild espeak-1.45.05-1.fc14 (FEDORA-2011-12878) Software speech synthesizer (text-to-speech) Update Information: This is new version of espeak that fixes crashes and many other bugs and also introduced new features. For full list see changelog on https://sourceforge.net/projects/espeak/files/espeak/espeak-1.45/ ChangeLog: * Thu Sep 15 2011 Jaroslav Škarvada - 1.45.05-1 - New version - Updated runtime_detection patch - Dropped gcc_no_libstdc++ patch * Tue Feb 8 2011 Fedora Release Engineering - 1.43-3 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_15_Mass_Rebuild References: [ 1 ] Bug #577941 - volume mixer changes to maximum when running espeak and some other apps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577941 =
Fedora 15 updates-testing report
The following Fedora 15 Security updates need testing: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-5.3.8-1.fc15,php-eaccelerator-0.9.6.1-9.fc15,maniadrive-1.2-32.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/qt-4.7.4-2.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/zabbix-1.8.7-2.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cyrus-imapd-2.4.11-1.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/foomatic-4.0.8-3.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rsyslog-5.8.5-1.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/quassel-0.7.3-1.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cherokee-1.2.99-1.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/opensaml-2.3-4.fc15 The following Fedora 15 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sendmail-8.14.5-2.fc15.1 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/evolution-data-server-3.0.3-2.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-qxl-0.0.21-5.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libxfce4util-4.8.2-1.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openldap-2.4.24-5.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/grubby-7.0.16-5.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lldpad-0.9.41-4.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/evolution-mapi-3.0.3-2.fc15,evolution-exchange-3.0.3-1.fc15,evolution-3.0.3-1.fc15,evolution-data-server-3.0.3-1.fc15,gtkhtml3-4.0.2-1.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/livecd-tools-15.8-1.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gcc-4.6.1-9.fc15,libtool-2.4-6.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nspr-4.8.8-4.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-softokn-3.12.10-4.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mash-0.5.22-1.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.2.904-14.fc15.1 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libfprint-0.4.0-1.fc15,fprintd-0.4.1-1.fc15 The following builds have been pushed to Fedora 15 updates-testing Pound-2.6-0.3.fc15.f ding-libs-0.1.3-5.fc15 erlang-luke-0.2.4-1.fc15 erlang-riak_client-1.2.0-1.fc15 espeak-1.45.05-1.fc15 fluidsynth-1.1.5-2.fc15 gauche-0.9.2-1.fc15 gauche-gl-0.5.1-2.fc15 gauche-gtk-0.6-0.2.20110725git598828842a339.fc15 gpodder-2.19-1.fc15 gstreamer-java-1.5-1.fc15 hanazono-fonts-20110915-1.fc15 ibus-m17n-1.3.3-4.fc15 java-service-wrapper-3.2.5-6.fc15 jpilot-1.8.1-2.fc15 krb5-1.9.1-12.fc15 libguestfs-1.10.9-1.fc15 libreoffice-3.3.3.1-6.fc15 malaga-suomi-voikko-1.10-1.fc15 opensaml-2.3-4.fc15 orage-4.8.2-1.fc15 pdfedit-0.4.5-4.fc15 perl-SVN-Simple-0.28-1.fc15 plowshare-0.9.4-0.15.20110914git.fc15 python-dateutil-1.5-3.fc15 python-matplotlib-1.0.1-12.fc15 python-shapely-1.2.13-1.fc15 qt-4.7.4-2.fc15 sane-backends-1.0.22-4.fc15 scim-1.4.11-1.fc15 snappy-1.0.4-1.fc15 tinc-1.0.16-1.fc15 zoneminder-1.24.4-3.fc15 Details about builds: Pound-2.6-0.3.fc15.f (FEDORA-2011-12894) Reverse proxy and load balancer Update Information: New upstream version, fixes a segfault at start. ChangeLog: * Sat Sep 17 2011 Ruben Kerkhof 2.6-0.3.f - Upstream released new version * Fri Sep 16 2011 Tom Callaway 2.6-0.2.c - convert to systemd References: [ 1 ] Bug #714585 - Pound segfaults https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=714585 ding-libs-0.1.3-5.fc15 (FEDORA-2011-12893) "Ding is not GLib" assorted utility libraries Update Information: Fixes a serious bug in libdhash with very large (> 1024 slots) initial size ChangeLog: * Thu Sep 15 2011 Stephen Gallagher - 0.1.3-5 - New upstream release 0.1.3 - Fixes a serious issue with libdhash and large initial hash sizes References: [ 1 ] Bug #735464 - dhash can corrupt memory if initial table size is large https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=735464 erlang-luke-0.2.4-1.fc15 (FEDORA-2011-12886) Dataflow / MapReduce coordination framework Update
Re: Another issue with install and GPT
On 09/17/2011 06:55 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 07:52 -0400, Scott Robbins wrote: >> I accidentally sent this through a different address, so I think it's >> just going to come back to me. If it turns out to be a double post, >> please forgive me. >> >> >> >> I'm not sure if this is a bug, or a one time fluke. I don't have time >> or hardware to do several test installs, but perhaps someone else has >> experienced it. > There is a bug report on a very similar case here: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738964 > > it does seem like there may be an issue with the detection of whether a > BIOS boot partition is necessary when installing from a USB stick. > However, please do verify this with an image written via dd or > livecd-iso-to-disk. We do not support unetbootin, as you said. Just performed two test of an usb key both created livecd-to-iso One network install and another one of an usb key it self ( dvd ) In both the installation process itself went but both times it resulted in anaconda installing the mbr on the usb key which leaves the user with unbootable system ( without the key ) and totally unrecovarable ( since they need to shrink the primary partition to create a mbr partition on it ) . JBG -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Another issue with install and GPT
On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 07:52 -0400, Scott Robbins wrote: > I accidentally sent this through a different address, so I think it's > just going to come back to me. If it turns out to be a double post, > please forgive me. > > > > I'm not sure if this is a bug, or a one time fluke. I don't have time > or hardware to do several test installs, but perhaps someone else has > experienced it. There is a bug report on a very similar case here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738964 it does seem like there may be an issue with the detection of whether a BIOS boot partition is necessary when installing from a USB stick. However, please do verify this with an image written via dd or livecd-iso-to-disk. We do not support unetbootin, as you said. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Another issue with install and GPT
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 04:57:44PM +0100, mike cloaked wrote: > On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Scott Robbins wrote: > > > > > > What I think might have happened: > > > > When I got to partitioning, the USB stick was shown as /dev/sdb. It had > > the EFI partition on it, put there, I imagine, when Unetbootin installed > > the netinstall.iso that I used. Therefore, Anaconda saw that there was > > a BIOS partition and didn't give a warning. > > > > One thing worth checking is that when you did the install running from > a usb stick - there has been a long standing issue that the bootloader > may get installed on the key instead of your hard drive unless you > check and change the bootloader section when you get to that screen in > the install process? That has bitten me many times - and I don't know > if that bug has been fully squashed yet? > Hi Mike, thanks for the response. I think that's been fixed. I do remember previously having to change the boot order, and make sure that it wasn't installing grub on the USB drive, so I'm pretty sure that's not relevant in this case. -- Scott Robbins PGP keyID EB3467D6 ( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 ) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6 Wesley: Back, creature of the night! Leave this place! Evil Willow: Don't wanna. Wesley: (threatens with holy water) Evil Willow: (sighs) Whatever. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Another issue with install and GPT
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Scott Robbins wrote: > > I accidentally sent this through a different address, so I think it's > just going to come back to me. If it turns out to be a double post, > please forgive me. > > > > I'm not sure if this is a bug, or a one time fluke. I don't have time > or hardware to do several test installs, but perhaps someone else has > experienced it. > > What happened: I used unetbootin (yes, I know it's not supported, but I > believe dd-ing an image to USB is supported, and might have the same > result.) > > I installed. I was not notified of a problem with not having a small > BIOS partition and thought the machine might have EFI support. > > After installation, I was unable to boot. (This was at work, while > doing several things, and didn't write down the error.) Having seen > some bugs having to do with SELinux, also tried to boot with enforce=0 > but no luck. > > I then reinstalled, this time making a 1 or 2 MB BIOS partition, It > installed with problem. > > What I think might have happened: > > When I got to partitioning, the USB stick was shown as /dev/sdb. It had > the EFI partition on it, put there, I imagine, when Unetbootin installed > the netinstall.iso that I used. Therefore, Anaconda saw that there was > a BIOS partition and didn't give a warning. > > If this is the case, IMHO, it should just be pointed out in the release > notes. Ideally, Anaconda would figure it out and point it out, but I > imagine that would be a lot of work, and it's late, and certainly not, > again IMHO, a blocker. > > I reiterate, I don't know if that is what happened, it's just what I > think happened, and perhaps there was some other thing that I missed > that caused the first install to not boot. Perhaps someone could test > this--install, from a USB onto a drive with no BIOS boot partition (and > no builtin EFI support), see if such a partition is shown on the USB > stick and see if, after installation, it boots. > -- One thing worth checking is that when you did the install running from a usb stick - there has been a long standing issue that the bootloader may get installed on the key instead of your hard drive unless you check and change the bootloader section when you get to that screen in the install process? That has bitten me many times - and I don't know if that bug has been fully squashed yet? This may not apply in your case but is certainly worth checking. -- mike c -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: test Digest, Vol 91, Issue 70 (dd of netinstall.iso to USB)
> >1. Another issue with install and GPT (Scott Robbins) > > > -- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 07:52:55 -0400 > From: Scott Robbins > Subject: Another issue with install and GPT > To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases > > Message-ID: <20110917115255.ga7...@scott1.scottro.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > > I accidentally sent this through a different address, so I think it's > just going to come back to me. If it turns out to be a double post, > please forgive me. > > > > I'm not sure if this is a bug, or a one time fluke. I don't have time > or hardware to do several test installs, but perhaps someone else has > experienced it. > > What happened: I used unetbootin (yes, I know it's not supported, but I > believe dd-ing an image to USB is supported, and might have the same > result.) > > I installed. I was not notified of a problem with not having a small > BIOS partition and thought the machine might have EFI support. > > After installation, I was unable to boot. (This was at work, while > doing several things, and didn't write down the error.) Having seen > some bugs having to do with SELinux, also tried to boot with enforce=0 > but no luck. > > A-) Try using dd directly: > # dd if=Fedora-16-Beta-RC1-i386-netinst.iso of=/dev/sdg bs=2M > 132+0 records in > 132+0 records out > 276824064 bytes (277 MB) copied, 28.6564 s, 9.7 MB/s The resulting USB Boots anaconda fine (just tested it on ACER ASPIRE ONE N450) used it to write to /dev/sdb (2nd target USB) graphical desktop/customize now /sugar-desktop only installing now B-) Here are 2 methods that work for me on f15-f16 live isos: 1-)Booted CD: use diskutility on live CD or gparted to erase USB (/dev/sdb?) then format as ext4 use "liveinst" to USB custom:/ ext4 no swap (2x time as large USB req - swap is a bad use on a USB) 2_)For fedora liveusb-creator use terminal: "liveusb-creator --reset-mbr" choose .iso; set persistence size. ( use gparted fat formatted USB here) Have fun Tom Gilliard satellit_ on #sugar freenode IRC > I then reinstalled, this time making a 1 or 2 MB BIOS partition, It > installed with problem. > > What I think might have happened: > > When I got to partitioning, the USB stick was shown as /dev/sdb. It had > the EFI partition on it, put there, I imagine, when Unetbootin installed > the netinstall.iso that I used. Therefore, Anaconda saw that there was > a BIOS partition and didn't give a warning. > > If this is the case, IMHO, it should just be pointed out in the release > notes. Ideally, Anaconda would figure it out and point it out, but I > imagine that would be a lot of work, and it's late, and certainly not, > again IMHO, a blocker. > > I reiterate, I don't know if that is what happened, it's just what I > think happened, and perhaps there was some other thing that I missed > that caused the first install to not boot. Perhaps someone could test > this--install, from a USB onto a drive with no BIOS boot partition (and > no builtin EFI support), see if such a partition is shown on the USB > stick and see if, after installation, it boots. > -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Installing Beta RC1 (or trying)
On 08/17/2011 08:53 PM, Frederic Muller wrote: > On 08/11/2011 09:16 AM, Frederic Muller wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Tried to install and failed very quickly after selecting whether it was >> an upgrade or a new install (I picked new install). It asked me for the >> network to be able to save a trace but the "Select reporter" screen has >> no option, and 'configure events' neither. I can only close. >> >> Also there is an error message right at the start of the install which >> is systemd[0] service not started - file or directory not found. >> >> So RC3 didn't install at all for me. >> >> What should I do now? >> >> Thanks. >> Fred > > Same with RC5. The 2 minor issues with Anaconda are still here (no > navigation button with dual head, and no border when configuration the > wifi network password) but I was able to file a bug this time (also it > seemed ticking on Bugzilla, then clicking down and back on bugzilla > disable the ability to go "forward"). > > Well at least I manage to file a bug this time and it said it was a new one: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731356 > > Note that I was installing from USB from the DVD image. > > Fred https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739305 which i think is a duplicate from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731356 I am still unable to install F16 on my T60 and this since Alpha. Could someone look into this bug? Fred -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Another issue with install and GPT
I accidentally sent this through a different address, so I think it's just going to come back to me. If it turns out to be a double post, please forgive me. I'm not sure if this is a bug, or a one time fluke. I don't have time or hardware to do several test installs, but perhaps someone else has experienced it. What happened: I used unetbootin (yes, I know it's not supported, but I believe dd-ing an image to USB is supported, and might have the same result.) I installed. I was not notified of a problem with not having a small BIOS partition and thought the machine might have EFI support. After installation, I was unable to boot. (This was at work, while doing several things, and didn't write down the error.) Having seen some bugs having to do with SELinux, also tried to boot with enforce=0 but no luck. I then reinstalled, this time making a 1 or 2 MB BIOS partition, It installed with problem. What I think might have happened: When I got to partitioning, the USB stick was shown as /dev/sdb. It had the EFI partition on it, put there, I imagine, when Unetbootin installed the netinstall.iso that I used. Therefore, Anaconda saw that there was a BIOS partition and didn't give a warning. If this is the case, IMHO, it should just be pointed out in the release notes. Ideally, Anaconda would figure it out and point it out, but I imagine that would be a lot of work, and it's late, and certainly not, again IMHO, a blocker. I reiterate, I don't know if that is what happened, it's just what I think happened, and perhaps there was some other thing that I missed that caused the first install to not boot. Perhaps someone could test this--install, from a USB onto a drive with no BIOS boot partition (and no builtin EFI support), see if such a partition is shown on the USB stick and see if, after installation, it boots. -- Scott Robbins PGP keyID EB3467D6 ( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 ) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6 Cordelia: What's going on? Oh god, is the world ending? I have to research a paper on Bosnia for tomorrow, but if the world's ending, I'm not gonna bother. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
