Bug 344221
| Summary: | grub boot mbr on sdb1 fails, no /root/dev again | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Darwin H. Webb <thethirddoorontheleft> |
| Component: | anaconda | Assignee: | Anaconda Maintenance Team <anaconda-maint-list> |
| Status: | CLOSED INSUFFICIENT_DATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | urgent | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | 8 | CC: | spamcatch, triage |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | bzcl34nup | ||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2008-08-06 20:21:40 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Darwin H. Webb
2007-10-21 05:55:46 UTC
Can you please provide exactly what you changed your grub config to be? The install created a boot and grub for the sdb1 But firstboot came up in grub sda1 and I tired many chainload formats to get to the sdb1 grub but nothing worked. So I edited an older grub line in sda1 as it bootted to use the new install kerenl it was title root(hd1.0) kernel /vmlinuz-x.y.z.fc8 ro root=/dev/VG/LV initrd /initrd-x.y.x.fc8.img The first time I tied this I missing chaning the LV so it was not booint cand hung. I saw what I did and corrected the LV name That is when it started booting a normal but got the /rrot/dev/ not found The only thing I can even guess at is that I unchecked the first drive from the install and thus anaconda thinks it is using a one drive system and installs the boot mbr on the sdb mbr rather than the first sector of the sdb1 but somehow fails at booth. (Thats the only think I did on the installer other than click on advanced boot option and indicate to put the boot sector on the fist sector of sdb1. thanks, Darwin OK, I installed the dvd F8 20071024 and got the same grub results. I may not have ever installed a dvd on a second drive as that is usually the release. I used the fisrt part of anaaconda (remove all partitions, only sdb disk checked for install, seleceted sdb disk to boot from. Install ran fine and fisrtboot was into sda grub (no sign of sdb) Tried all forms of chainloader + (no go) edited a title in grub for sda to point to root (hd1,0) edited the VG-LV to default of 00 edit version and initrd version to dvd kernel 31 The new install boot up perfect. I look a /boot - ok grub - ok grub.conf - NOT ok the for boot is commited out #/boot=dev/sdb Below is the title showing root (hdo,o) <<--- This is the problem, it should be root (hd1,0) I never thoht of looking there before since it boots with the grub sda edit, but then trying to figure out how it could boot at all without a boot sector lead me there, because it can't. So the root (hdn,0 must be changed to match the sdx (where x=n+1) It would be good if it worked on install be at least the notes need to be changed. The leaves only the /root/dev/ not found problem with the live install. I will try that later and on use the same anaconda screens and see if it is related to the root (hd0,0) problem. Darwin OK, chainloader +1 just does NOT work even with the correct sdb grub.conf I use rootnoverify (hd1,0) makeactive chainloader +1 then press b I get error 13 - non exicutable format. There is simply NOT a boot sector on sdb1. Darwin I can confirm this. There is no boot sector being installed on (sdb1) when directed to do so. It's being located on the MBR of sdb no matter what options are selected. Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported during the development of Fedora 8. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are changing the version of this bug to '8'. If this bug still exists in rawhide, please change the version back to rawhide. (If you're unable to change the bug's version, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.) Thanks for your help and we apologize for the interruption. The process we're following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again. Have you encountered this problem in F9? |