[Server-devel] XS 0.5.1 RC - Last round of testing...

[Sameer Verma]

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 2:57 AM, Jerry Vonau <jvonau at shaw.ca> wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 23:30 -0800, Sameer Verma wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 10:37 PM, Sameer Verma <sverma at sfsu.edu> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Martin Langhoff
>> > <martin.langhoff at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Sameer Verma <sverma at sfsu.edu> wrote:
>> >>> was with eth0 not showing up. It looks like I am the victim of the
>> >>> dreaded Realtek 8139 bug. It worked in XS 0.4 but in 0.5.1 it refuses
>> >>> to show up.
>> >>
>> >> Strange, but it does look like a driver problem.
>> >>
>> >> The links you provide show various different problems with that NIC.
>> >> In some cases, irqpoll in the kernel boot line fixes, in others some
>> >> fiddling with ethtool was needed...
>> >>
>> >> It'll be good to know which of the fixes helps you :-)
>> >
>> > appending irqpoll has fixed that problem. Now, I've hit another bug.
>> > This is yum broken with _sha256 as stated here.
>> > http://fedoraforum.org/forum/showthread.php?t=193507
>> >
>> > I'm going to try the workaround.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> BTW, if you upgraded from XS-0.4, it might be a good idea to rm
>> >> /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules
>> >
>> > No, this was a clean install. I'm running the server for testing only,
>> > so I can afford to wipe it clean.
>> >
>> > Sameer
>> > --
>> > Dr. Sameer Verma, Ph.D.
>> > Associate Professor of Information Systems
>> > San Francisco State University
>> > San Francisco CA 94132 USA
>> > http://verma.sfsu.edu/
>> > http://opensource.sfsu.edu/
>> >
>>
>>
>> So, after mucking around last night and today, I wiped my XS box and
>> reformatted it to remove ALL traces of 0.4  I have a clean 0.5.1
>> install on it. md5sum of the ISO is c0fde10b93cab3cb1a3bc3a42ceb5408
>>
>> I've circumvented the realtek 8139 problem by appending irqpoll in
>> grub.conf That seems to work, although I have to bring up eth0
>> manually and issuing dhcient eth0
>>
>> I still hit the bug of _sha256 as mentioned here:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454179
>>
>> Note that I am not upgrading anything. Its a clean install. I believe
>> the appropriate word for this is: AARGH!
>>
>> I wish Fedora had  LTS or "Stable" branch (it does...kinda...in
>> RHEL...are we allowed to say CentOS here?) but that's another thread
>> and another rant. It does remind me of why I don't run anything on
>> Fedora anymore.
>>
>> Anyway, this is getting in the way. Is anyone seeing this too? If so,
>> then its a significant barrier for 0.5.1
>>
>> Suggestions?
>
> Can you post the /root/install.log and /root/anaconda.log or just send
> them to me.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
>
>

I've attached both. Note: anaconda.log was in /var/log/ and not in /root

Sameer
-- 
Dr. Sameer Verma, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Information Systems
San Francisco State University
San Francisco CA 94132 USA
http://verma.sfsu.edu/
http://opensource.sfsu.edu/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: install.log
Type: text/x-log
Size: 31878 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090213/28e0d88d/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: anaconda.log
Type: text/x-log
Size: 61783 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090213/28e0d88d/attachment-0001.bin>