On 26/09/10 13:53, He Rui wrote: > Hi Steven, > > On Sun, 2010-09-26 at 03:43 +1000, Steven Haigh wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I've tried just about everything over the last 12 hours to get F14 Beta 3 to >> install from DVD with no success. >> >> I've been booting from the DVD and found that at the repo selection screen, >> only internet repos are found. The install DVD is lost and the installation >> will not proceed without downloading all packages from an internet repo. >> This defeats the purpose of having a DVD... I could see the packages in >> /mnt/sysimage (I think), and the DVD was certainly present, just ignored. > > This is not as expected. DVD installation is a basic test included in > the pre-release validation install tests, and we've verified that media > repo will be selected as default if install from Beta RC3 DVD at least > both on kvm and bare metal. The iso should be mounted on /mnt/source > where the packages are stored. So can you provide the details of your > installation steps and environment? And the contents > in /tmp/anaconda.log? Is this bug[1] similar to yours? Thanks in > advance. > > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=627789 > I did see this bug report - but after the install had completed - this being the case I didn't get a chance to see the log. Silly me also deleted the ks/other logs in /root after the install (it was very very early in the morning after tinkering all night!) As I can reproduce it every time, I'll start running the install up until where the issue happens and see what info I can gather. Thankfully, as long as I don't set any paritions to format, it shouldn't kill my (eventually) successful install. >> I also found that when doing an ethereal dump on my ASDL connection that >> each package seemed to be downloaded twice. For each package that was >> downloaded, I saw 2 separate GET requests heading to the web server. I could >> not find any specific information about this from the installer. >> >> I also noticed that the defaults for an XFS filesystem are to continue to >> use a 256 byte inode. This is VERY suboptimal with selinux enabled and can >> cause major performance issues. I lodged a bug on this here: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=637369 >> >> All in all, for a Beta GOLD release, I would have at least expected the DVD >> installation to be tested before RC3 was declared gold :( > > I've also read your another thread. Well, have you noticed the test > announcements(eg.[2]) sent out when each build was available? We did it > every time and both installation and desktop tests were executed and the > results were provided on the results pages[3]. Then based on the results > and other bugs on bugzilla, the candidate was considered if it met the > release criteria[4] or not. So DVD installation would surely be tested > before released, but everyone has different install environment, we > cannot guarantee it passes in every way. However, if you encountered an > issue, discussion is welcomed in the list to help find the root cause > and resolve the problem. > > Also if you have any suggestion for the installation validation test[5], > feel free to talk. :) > > > Thanks, > Hurry > > [2] > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2010-September/093947.html > > [3] > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_14_Test_Results > > [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_14_Beta_Release_Criteria > > [5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Installation_validation_testing > > Good info to know. I did remember seeing a few install reports, but nothing I saw while I was struggling with the install seemed to line up with what I was seeing. -- Steven Haigh Email: netwiz@xxxxxxxxx Web: http://www.crc.id.au Phone: (03) 9001 6090 - 0412 935 897 Fax: (03) 8338 0299 -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
