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

[Jerry Vonau]

On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 10:19 -0800, Sameer Verma wrote:
> 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

Martin:

I'm seeing the same errors in the install log as Sameer while installing
on an XO. openssl does not get installed, because uname returns as an
i586 while there is no openssl.586 in the repo just .686. Just to backup
my hunch note that a 586 kernel gets installed as recorded in the
install log. "yum repolist" returns the same error as mentioned in the
BZ on the XO.

Sameer:
What does "uname -a" return on this laptop? 


Jerry