Because the INSTALLER kernel is different to the INSTALLED kernel. Its compiled with different options (especially evident under EL4) and it has different modules. chroot ain't everything... CC -----Original Message----- From: kickstart-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:kickstart-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Edward F. Brown Sent: Thursday, 31 August 2006 11:20 AM To: Discussion list about Kickstart Subject: RE: error handling in %post (was: Re: trying to mount the dvd during post install.) And WHY is having a "minimal %post section" a good thing? Why not run the commands in ks_post.sh in ks? On Wed, August 30, 2006 5:36 pm, Coe, Colin C. wrote: > > We have a minimal %post section that only copies our script ks_post.sh > to /var/tmp and inserts 'sh /var/tmp/ks_post.sh' into /etc/rc.d/rc.local > with a clean up after it has run. > > As far as debugging goes, whats wrong with: > %post > set -x > cmd1 && > cmd2 && > cmd3 && > cmd4 || > fixit > > ??? > > All the debugging goes to vt3. > > CC > > -----Original Message----- > From: kickstart-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:kickstart-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ed Brown > Sent: Thursday, 31 August 2006 7:32 AM > To: Discussion list about Kickstart > Subject: error handling in %post (was: Re: trying to mount the dvd > during post install.) > > > Lambert Tran wrote: >> >> The trick at time was how to know the installation CD was actually is >> /tmp/cdrom... (your may be /tmp/dvd). To find out, we had a sleep 600 > at the >> %post section, and went look around. > > %post (and %pre) scripts are versatile and powerful tools, so why does > the kickstart environment have a reputation of being difficult to work > in? How many questions to this list revolve around figuring out how > to determine what the heck is going on in %pre and %post scripts? Who > has chosen to do things with scripts that execute on firstboot, rather > than try to get something done in %post? How many of us resort to > inserting sleeps or other tricks to buy time at a commandline to debug > problems? How hard would it be to provide a debug mode, where > non-zero return codes for commands (either all commands, or possibly > only for specially-indicated commands) results in seeing the command > that failed, and the reason/output if any, followed by a shell prompt? > Would this be useful for anyone here? (Is this the wrong list, > should it be posted to anaconda-devel instead (or also)?) > > -Ed? > > _______________________________________________ > Kickstart-list mailing list > Kickstart-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/kickstart-list > > _______________________________________________ > Kickstart-list mailing list > Kickstart-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/kickstart-list > _______________________________________________ Kickstart-list mailing list Kickstart-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/kickstart-list
