I looked under Installation Source
and there is a box Don't install the latest available software updates.
Install
the default versions provided by the install source above. which is unchecked
by default. I checked the box, but still get the same errors, so it's not
working.
That box
I am experiencing a few issues with the disk partitioning using
anaconda on F18 Alpha TC3. This is what I am seeing,
Custom partitioning is still under construction.
* Once a partition is created, I am unable to change the partition
size. I am having to delete the partition and recreate it.
1) Installation end up with a screen -
http://ompldr.org/vZjNhdw/QEMU_001.png
Okay, this is hiding the real error message. I've got a fix for it
committed and I'll be doing another build for f18-branch later today.
2) # anaconda
Traceback (most recent call last):
File /sbin/anaconda,
Because of changes in new anaconda [1] and after short discussion with
Chris Lumens, I propose to remove this beta criterion [2]:
'The rescue mode of the installer must be able to detect and mount
(read-write and read-only) LVM, encrypted, and RAID (BIOS, hardware, and
software
I wouldn't be hugely worried about waiving rescue mode for Alpha, but as
others have said, it's more problematic if it's not going to come back
for Beta or at least Final. Has Chris said anything about that?
My focus has been on getting a graphical UI ready to meet the alpha
criteria, plus
I understand anaconda is undergoing a significant and needed rewrite,
but is it wise to ship a release with a whole lot of installer
functionality removed? Maybe F18 should wait until anaconda is ready.
What we're talking about for storage here is:
(1) The filtering UI isn't going to be
Doesn't pickup the inst.repo from the command line
I just tested this and it worked. Got more data to share?
using f17:
doesn't ask/set root password
And it won't. We're going to set the first created user up as the
admin, so that's how that will happen.
doesn't correctly
In every instance, the fascist new Anaconda installs without
reporting errors.
What are you even talking about?
- Chris
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Probably talking about the new Anaconda-UI?
But it's not in rawhide yet.
- Chris
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Not kidding, but neither does avoid equal refuse. Plus, all modern
standards-compliant browsers read the CSS the same, so it isn't my
browser that decides it should make text smaller than my
personalized personal computer preference, or low contrast. It's
just following so-called suggestions
Well, there's an obvious counterpoint there...*only* half of all people
pick live images to use for installations, despite the fact they're a
smaller and more convenient format. Did you consider the possible
reasons why half of all people continue to choose to download the DVD
(even though
(3) The time for making major design decisions was the first half of
2011, when we started talking about this.
And now is too soon to put it on F19's table?
We're not going to redesign the new UI again around the concept of
advanced vs. normal users. There may be certain places where we can
Idea: the installer branches just from the beginning:
-Easy install (only installs Gnome)
-Advanced install (shows a big warning screen about installng multiple
DEs, could be confusing, not recommended for newcomers, your pet could
die, etc etc ).
bingo, both sides pleased.
See? It
I think it's much simpler: Just revert the DE radio buttons to the original
checkboxes, so people can choose more than one, and if someone does that, pop
up
a warning.
We are trying to keep the number of spurious dialogs and confirmations
to a minimum, as we've gotten many complaints over
Is this due to Anaconda's constant rewrite every release cycle that
this happens?
anaconda does not do a constant rewrite every release cycle.
- Chris
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
No packages need to be installed, everything is right there in the
install environment. In the window with the traceback, there's a
'debug' option that will drop you into PDB (I haven't looked at the
code, but it probably calls pdb.post_mortem() with the exception
object). See
Just kidding ... sort of.
I'm willing to bet that I wouldn't be getting a NameError: global name
'BRFSError' is not defined traceback if it were. (BTRFSError anyone?)
Bugzilla at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794504.
You know, redoing it in Haskell really would solve a lot
The installed system must run normally if the user chooses to install
without SELinux
There is no test case for this now.
I have one note on this. There is used noselinux option, but it doesn't work
now. I filled bug [2] there is another option with the same effect -
selinux=0 and
The installer must be able to handle the failure and report the issue. The
installer must be also able to access debug mode.
Debug mode is intended to be used by developers to test and fix
anaconda. I don't think this belongs in test criteria.
- Chris
--
test mailing list
And yet several people here on your volunteer test team, the people
who are willing and able to use new releases early so that problems
are fleshed out and can be addressed before release, have stated
that they use this ability on a regular basis and would be pained to
see it go.
A
Does this entry in the anaconda changelog really mean what I think it does:
/ must be on a partition or LV that will be formatted. Reusing an
existing / is not allowed.
--
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/Changes#Fedora_15_to_Fedora_16_.28as_of_anaconda-16.14.3-1.29
It means if
Ah only for fresh installs. Well that makes sense. I wasn't reading it
for upgrades too, which would have caused a problem or two.
I've updated the wiki page to clarify this.
- Chris
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
kickstart is a very broad area; you can write extremely complex
kickstart files that do a lot of stuff. So broadly what we'd need to do
is define a subset of kickstart functionality that we expect to work,
and then possibly divide that up by release phase (so some stuff must
work by Beta, the
Are there any new grub2-related kickstart settings for the bootloader
line in kickstart?
No, there have been no changes to the bootloader command for grub2.
Should there be?
- Chris
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
OT for this thread but for the record regarding kickstart
documentation: the part biosboot --fstype=biosboot --size=1
kickstart entry to create a bios_grub partition on a GPT disk isn't
yet documented on the kickstart fp.o page.
There's still some discussion on whether we're going to require
I checked in with the kind folks in #anaconda ... for fresh Fedora 16
installations, only grub2 will be used.
Then there needs to be an option to install no bootloader. There's no excuse
for making anything so poorly documented the default anything, much less an
only anything.
If you
So, we have the choice of waiting for all blockers to be resolved before
we do the next compose, which might take a while, or doing a TC2 with
the most critical fixes in. What approach do people think we should
take? Would a TC2 have any value or should we just clean up all the
blockers
A propos of this, does anaconda warn you may be doing something silly if
you create a separate /usr partition in custom partitioning? Should it?
If /usr as a separate partition has always worked and doesn't now, it
should probably throw up a warning, no?
At least Disk Druid should not
Hmm, also what does this do to PXE booting. IIRC there is a (relatively
low) limit on the size of the initrd loaded by pxelinux.
It's worked fine for me in all systems tested.
- Chris
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
3) /usr/bin/liveinst fails with an error report of
missing /usr/bin/hal-lock
Oooh, bad anaconda, depending on hal. No cookie for you. Fileabug!
What would be even more useful would be suggesting what we should be
doing to replace the usage of /usr/bin/hal-lock.
- Chris
--
test mailing
I think you may have stated this already, which of the manual
installation validation storage tests [1] are now automated using your
unittests?
Under Install Variations General Tests, all the Partitioning area
except for QA:Testcase_Anaconda_autopart_(shrink)_install is now
automated. I
One thing I look for with different storage devices is that they display
differently in the anaconda UI. Likely not something we can test with
your framework.
We can't do this today. However, a dogtail script is just another
method of automating an installation. Perhaps we could finally get
As you know, we've got this automated storage test system for anaconda
now. I've got enough tests to cover all the partitioning parts of the
Fedora test matrix (except for resizing, which kickstart cannot
express). You can see the list of tests for yourself here:
yeah, I agree this would be useful: we have a fairly ambitious final
release criterion that basically states that any failure to install to a
valid partition table (where the /boot and / are big enough, obviously)
with supported partition types is a release blocker. So we should have
some
c) The GUI install wouldn't work, but I fell back to text install.
d) I was disappointed that it would not let me select the packages
to install (I want KDE not Gnome)
Need the full install for that, LiveCD is GNOME.
I was using the 'full install'.
The key is (c), you did
As before, no text mode option is displayed.
Text mode is gone, gone, gone. No option for it will be displayed.
- Chris
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Text mode is gone, gone, gone. No option for it will be displayed.
Passing 'text' option to kernel seems to work fine. What did I not catch?
If you know the secret, you can get to it. But we don't go out of the
way to broadcast it.
- Chris
--
test mailing list
There's a kernel panic in the first stage of anaconda in x86_64 boot.iso
(probably in other x86_64 images as well):
Bug 621775 - kernel panic- not syncing: VFS : unable to mount root fs on
unknown-block(9,2)
anaconda hasn't even started running at this point, so it's a little
disingenuous
38 matches
Mail list logo
