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

[Jerry Vonau]

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