Bug 52361

Summary:	Roswell2 kickstart now stomps on Windows installation
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Public Beta	Reporter:	ajs <ajsfedora>
Component:	anaconda	Assignee:	Jeremy Katz <katzj>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:	Brock Organ <borgan>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	high
Version:	roswell
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:	2001-08-23 23:07:05 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 ajs 2001-08-23 02:49:01 UTC

Description of Problem:

Starting with Roswell2 the kickstart installer removes my Windows 2000
installation which resided on the first partition of my hard drive.

The partitioning section of my kickstart file is:

zerombr yes
clearpart --linux --drives=hda
part /boot --fstype ext3 --size=50 --ondisk=hda
part / --fstype ext3 --size=1100 --grow --ondisk=hda
part swap --size=880 --grow --maxsize=1760 --ondisk=hda


This worked just fine on Roswell #1.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How Reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install Win2k on first partition
2. Use kickstart to install Linux on the rest of the drive.

Actual Results:


Expected Results:


Additional Information:

Comment 1 Brent Fox 2001-08-23 19:08:17 UTC

katzj, have you seen any behavior like this?  I don't think this code changed
between Roswell 1 and Roswell 2.

Comment 2 Michael Fulbright 2001-08-23 22:29:40 UTC

Its because zerombr is ONLY supposed to remove the mbr if it is BAD.

Read the RH 5.0 installer code.

Comment 3 ajs 2001-08-23 23:04:54 UTC

It seems to do more than mess with the mbr (unless the mbr also has something to
do with the partition table that I'm not aware of) --- the fat32 partition is
completely removed.  I'm hesitant to reproduce this again since it takes so
damned long to install Windows 2000, but I think that there was a message on the
console where partition information is reported that may have said something
about not liking one of the partitions just before it created the linux
partitions.  Could it be that the partition table is misread?

Comment 4 Jeremy Katz 2001-08-23 23:06:47 UTC

Yes, the fact that this happens is a bug... I've got a patch which I'm testing
at the moment

Comment 5 Jeremy Katz 2001-08-23 23:18:39 UTC

Fixed in CVS

Comment 6 ajs 2001-08-24 14:54:43 UTC

Is there somewhere a bootnet.img with the new fixes that I could use to test things?

Comment 7 Jeremy Katz 2001-08-24 16:50:05 UTC

Unfortunately, the files which were changed have diverged a little bit too much
to easily create an updates disk with the fix without having to basically redo
the diff against the older tree.