 |
can you attach the anaconda.log from a rhel install ? |
2007-12-19 09:45
|
anaconda.log (9,941 bytes) |
|
|
I picked this log file from an ASTNOW install i had just finished, hope that helps. |
|
|
Can you re-test with the CentOS-5.2 Installer and let us know if this issue is resolved or not ? |
|
|
Same error when trying to install CentOS 5.2 on Geode hardware: Traceback (most recent call first): File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/yum/packageSack.py", line 750, in returnNewestByName raise PackageSackError, 'No Package Matching %s' % name File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/yum/packageSack.py", line 345, in returnNewestByName return bestofeach.returnNewestByName(name) File "/tmp/treedir.8196/instimage/usr/lib/anaconda/yuminstall.py", line 1091, in getBestKernelByArch pkgs = ayum.pkgSack.returnNewestByName(pkgname) File "/tmp/treedir.8196/instimage/usr/lib/anaconda/yuminstall.py", line 1100, in selectBestKernel kpkg = getBestKernelByArch("kernel", self.ayum) ....... ....... ....... Is it possible to select the kernel manually, so we can work around this issue? |
|
|
A possible work-around using VMware: http://www.trixbox.org/forums/trixbox-forums/trixbox-projects/trixbox-ce-embedded-alix-success |
|
|
thats not an RHEL anaconda.log - its from some other random distro ( based on paths and the install mechanism. Also that kernel has never been shipped by redhat ). |
|
|
Can you test the install with the "rpmarch=i686" on the command line for the installer. eg: at the bootup screen for the installer type: linux rpmarch=i686 |
|
|
It seems like it should be possible to solve this by passing --targetarch i686 on the command line to anaconda, although it's not clear how to add extra command line options without rebuilding stage2. |
|
|
@rwmj: the rpmarch=i686 on the boot line will get passed to targetarch. |
|
|
So I did rpmarch=i686 on the kernel command line, and (with RHEL 5, not CentOS) that does seem to work. Interestingly, the option does _not_ get passed on the anaconda command line. Anaconda must be accessing /proc/cmdline directly. I'll have to check the source later to find out what it's doing. |
|
|
No, unfortunately that's no good - the install fails later on. I'll attach the new anaconda.log in a moment. Since that install trashed the original filesystem on this machine, I no longer have any method of booting the machine, so I'll need to do the install by pulling out the hard drive and mounting it on another machine. |
|
2008-09-14 10:58
|
anaconda-with-rpmarch.log (407,287 bytes) |
|
|
Hi There, I found this from http://camltastic.blogspot.com/2008/09/home-server-part-3-quick-update.html and am also trying to install CentOS 5.2 onto a vigen MPC-L, and can confirm the same issues as reported below; booting with the arguments "linux acpi=off rpmarch=i686 askmethod" allows anaconda to get as far as downloading/installing the packages but then crashes out with only "reboot" as the only option to choose. Cheers, Nick |
|
|
I have an "Flepo miniPC alpha" from http://www.flepo.de/index.php?id=66 and am also trying to install CentOS 5.2. I can confirm the same issues as reported; booting with the arguments "linux rpmarch=i686 ks=hd:hda3:/testbox-ks.cfg" allows anaconda to get as far as to prepare installing the packages but then crashes out with only "reboot" as the only option to choose. The anaconda.log is like the uploaded anaconda-with-rpmarch.log I read in "[CentOS-devel] geode anyone ?" about an updates.img to patch anaconda. I am able to help testing if updates.img is available. |
|
|
I have the same problem with my appliance with AMD Geode CPU. I tried many solutions, but I can only install a CentOS 4.6... I tried to upgrade it to version 5.2, but i had no luck. The kernel updated without problems (using the patched kernel found here http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/kernel/5/bz_pre53/i386/) using "rpm --ignorearch --force --nodeps <package>" but when i tried to update the other packages I got an error with the RPM program itself... In my opinion the CentOS 5.2 can run smoothly with Geode, but the installer must be patched so that it doesn't try to get the platform architecture. Does anyone know how to make an installer patched in this way? Thanks in advance |
|
|
I found a solution for my geode based netbook. I have used CentOS-5.2-installer.iso livecd to boot and install the os. After boot make a file /etc/rpm/platform and place i686-redhat-linux in it $ cat /etc/rpm/platform i686-redhat-linux Then install from the icon on the desktop. HTH |
|
|
I am running into this issue with CentOS 5.3 on a Soekris Net5501 (Geode LX 500 Mhz). This link: http://www.mail-archive.com/soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com/msg02792.html implies that there is a problem with the kernel package from Red Hat. Adding rpmarch=i686 helps, but then it crashes later on in the install process. |
|
|
I dont have a machine to test this or work with this one, so will leave it open and monitor it if anyone wants to go ahead and propose a fix or a process that might make it work |
|
|
As far as I investigated this IMHO CentOS 5.X can not be installed on i586 architecture. The output of /proc/cpuinfo is: processor : 0 vendor_id : AuthenticAMD cpu family : 5 model : 10 model name : Geode(TM) Integrated Processor by AMD PCS stepping : 2 cpu MHz : 498.045 cache size : 128 KB fdiv_bug : no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug : no coma_bug : no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 1 wp : yes flags : fpu de pse tsc msr cx8 pge cmov clflush mmx mmxext 3dnowext 3dnow up bogomips : 996.09 clflush size : 32 power management: Because of cpu family: 5 the yum depsolving is insisting in installing an i586 kernel package. This package does not exist, only an i686 one. Yum is ignoring all hints to install for an i686 architecture. |
|
|
In Fedora this: http://lists.baseurl.org/pipermail/yum-devel/2009-August/005767.html is done to make it possible to install with the i686 kernel package. |
|
|
There is this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=620570 bug report. Maybe the modifications described there can be considered for inclusion in CentOS-5.6 release. |
|
2011-01-24 14:21
|
geode-arch.patch (332 bytes) |
|
2011-01-24 14:22
|
rpm-4.7.1-geode-i686.patch (343 bytes) |
|
|
Fedora is applying the geode-arch.patch since yum-3.2.24-3.fc12.src.rpm and the rpm-4.7.1-geode-i686.patch since rpm-4.7.1-4.fc12.src.rpm to have geode install support |
|
|
Could some of this changeset required be shipped as an updates.img instead of anaconda's payload being changed at build time ? If so, that would be my first preference; allowing us to ship the main distro as is, and do this for the specific required geode users via an 'alternative' install disk |
|
|
I did some experiments with updates.img which contain the two files with the modifications applied. It does not work as expected. Since I do not know the creation and functionality of updates.img very well there may be some error in there. Modifying the files after booting the install media neither works since they reside in a read only location. yum-3.2.25-12.el6.src.rpm and rpm-4.8.0-4.el6.src.rpm also apply the patches and my hope was for CentOS 6 but since the RHEL6.0 Beta2 has only a PAE-kernel this will also be a no go for geode out of the box. |
|
2011-01-27 17:19
|
updates.img.tgz (8,292 bytes) |
|
|
FWIW, If the updates.img-method is working, I guess it is still required to have the modifications applied to the yum- and rpm-package to be able to update and install new packages after the installation. yum and rpm will still use the wrong arch without the modifications. |
|
|
the updates.img method was not working, so I rebuilt the anaconda installer images with the 2 patches. The initial (network PXE-)install chugged along nicely and completed sucessfully. I took a pristine i386 install tree from a mirror and compared it to my new tree. The files different are - not surprisingly: [os]# diff -r i386/ geode/ Binary files i386/images/boot.iso and geode/images/boot.iso differ Binary files i386/images/diskboot.img and geode/images/diskboot.img differ Binary files i386/images/minstg2.img and geode/images/minstg2.img differ Binary files i386/images/pxeboot/initrd.img and geode/images/pxeboot/initrd.img differ Binary files i386/images/stage2.img and geode/images/stage2.img differ Binary files i386/images/xen/initrd.img and geode/images/xen/initrd.img differ Binary files i386/isolinux/initrd.img and geode/isolinux/initrd.img differ Binary files i386/isolinux/isolinux.bin and geode/isolinux/isolinux.bin differ NOTE HOWEVER i still had to add rpmarch=i686 on the pxelinux kernel boot line. I'll try to get the installed image to use yum update without patches later on, by provinding the /etc/rpm/platform file and will keep you posted. |
|
|
N.B. i am not sure the initrd images need to be different at all, i just don't know the exact anaconda settings the original installer is build with. I think if someone were to spin a new installer with the canon centos build system, the actual files different would only be the Stage2 images. |
- Anonymous
