Bug 695054
Summary: | Fail to exercise the addition of a FTP-based package repository during installation. | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Tao Wu <twu> | ||||
Component: | anaconda | Assignee: | Radek Vykydal <rvykydal> | ||||
Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||
Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |||||
Priority: | unspecified | ||||||
Version: | 15 | CC: | bigslowfat, jlaska, jonathan, rhe, rvykydal, sdharane, vanmeeuwen+fedora | ||||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||
Target Release: | --- | ||||||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||
OS: | Unspecified | ||||||
Whiteboard: | |||||||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
Last Closed: | 2011-06-23 09:58:21 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: | |||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Tao Wu
2011-04-10 08:11:24 UTC
Hi Tao, I can't reproduce your issue. My step is: 1. Boot f-15-beta-rc2-i386(x86_64)-dvd.iso 2. Proceed with default settings until software selection step 3. At the software selection step, click 'Add additional software repositories' and provide: * Repository name * Repository type - HTTP/FTP * Repository URL - ftp://download.englab.nay.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/development/15/i386/os With the above steps, the ftp repo can be retrieved and installed as expected. Can you please upload /tmp/anaconda.log when this error occurs? And is it similar to bug#679709? The last question is one I'm curious about too. If you add an HTTP repo first, does the addition of the FTP repo then work? It's interesting when I attempted a same mirror ftp://mirrors.sohu.com/fedora/development/15/x86_64/os/ (run by Sohu Inc, China). In the VirtualBox install, anaconda fails to retrieve metadata, but in a VMware-based install, it did get it and finished cleanly. (In reply to comment #1) > Hi Tao, I can't reproduce your issue. My step is: > > 1. Boot f-15-beta-rc2-i386(x86_64)-dvd.iso > 2. Proceed with default settings until software selection step > 3. At the software selection step, click 'Add additional software repositories' > and provide: > > * Repository name > * Repository type - HTTP/FTP > * Repository URL - > > ftp://download.englab.nay.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/development/15/i386/os > > With the above steps, the ftp repo can be retrieved and installed as expected. > > Can you please upload /tmp/anaconda.log when this error occurs? And is it > similar to bug#679709? Hi Hurry, Since other cases were tested in the same KVM environment after this case, the log file has been washed away. So I'm sorry that there are no valid log files now, next time I should save the related files in time. The test result which appeared that time is not similar with bug#679709, because whether add a http repo first or not, it always can not read the metadata from additional repository. Several tests on 32bit and 64bit has been done respectively today, but the test result has been totally different, while the test environment does not change. No matter on which arch, 32bit or 64bit, the package metadata from additional repository is read correctly. If nothing changed on the ftp source, I think that might be a problem with my network status on that time. Perhaps the anaconda really did not achieved the file from the ftp source? No. When my testcase fails in VBox, I switched to tty2 and used ftp command but successfully retrieved several files on the same FTP server. Rebooting is of no help. Maybe it be an issue of the virtual machine itself??? This looks like a duplicate of bug #679709. I found a reproducer of in which adding http:// repository didn't help too. It would actually help only if the ftp repo is added within 30 seconds from adding of the http repository (or from last successful ftp or http transfer generally). (In reply to comment #7) > This looks like a duplicate of bug #679709. I found a reproducer of of the bug #679709 I mean *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 679709 *** |