Bug 4876

Summary:	Can't install RHL 6.0 onto SW RAID.
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Linux	Reporter:	michaeloqu
Component:	installer	Assignee:	Jay Turner <jturner>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	high
Version:	6.0	CC:	srevivo
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	1999-09-25 00:19:54 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 michaeloqu 1999-09-03 02:59:59 UTC

See related bug # 4875, "SW RAID autodetect fails -- md is
module in default kernels."

Neither the current install disks for RHL 6.0 (distributed
in 29-May-1999 errata release "new boot images") nor
those distributed with the initial release are able to
install onto SW RAID partitions.

The facility simply isn't in the kernel images.  I
can get neither the Install or Upgrade options to work,
even with hours of hacking around the <Alt-F2> shell.

Additionally, I could not find any tools at any point of
the install process to _create_ SW RAID partitions.  I did
install a minimal system and was able to create and use
RAID partitions from that, but again, none of that worked
from the installer, even when using "Upgrade" to add a few
(hundred) more packages.

I don't have the disk realestate to install-and-copy.  At
this point, it looks like I'll have to install a very
minimal system (done), get RAID working (done), and then
manually install several hundred rpm packages to flesh it
out (will take a _long_ time to get done).

I'm not new to Unix sysadm (20+ years,) nor even to Linux,
but this one has me stumped.  I've set this bug's priority
and severity high because not much else works without being
able to install the operating sytstem.

Comment 1 Michael K. Johnson 1999-09-25 00:19:59 UTC

I'm closing this feature request with a resolution of "next
release" because we expect to include this functionality in
our next release.