Bug 700686

Summary:	kickstart net install specifying only "ks" fails
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora Documentation	Reporter:	i.goyret
Component:	install-guide	Assignee:	Petr Bokoc <pbokoc>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	Ruediger Landmann <rlandman+disabled>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	devel	CC:	i.goyret, jonathan, pbokoc, rlandman, rvykydal, vanmeeuwen+fedora, zach
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2013-07-31 14:34:03 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:

Description i.goyret 2011-04-29 02:49:07 UTC

Description of problem:

Kickstarting a system with just "ks" on the command line
fails after DHCP assigns the IP address. tty3 reports
"no bootserver was found" while tty1 asks for re-entering
kickstart parameters.

The DHCP server is configured exactly as described in
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/14/html/Installation_Guide/s2-kickstart2-networkbased.html

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

  System booted from a Fedora 14 CD #1.

How reproducible: Systematic.


Steps to Reproduce:
1. Configure a kickstart file for your system.
2. Configure a DHCP server as described in the documentation
3. Configure your server to NFS export the kickstart file and
   the installation tree (again, as described in the documentation).
4. Boot your target system from the CD adding "ks" to the
   boot command line.
  
Actual results:

kickstart fails to fetch the kickstart file.

Additional info:

After inspecting the source code, it seems like that the problem
is that anaconda looks for "server-name" instead of "next-server"
(as documented).

A workaround that works for me is to specify the same value for
"next-server" and for "server-name" on the DHCP server, eg:

 group {
  next-server 1.2.3.4;
  server-name "1.2.3.4";     <<<<<<<<<
  ...
  host x1 {
    filename "/kickstart/x1.ks";
    ...
  }
 }

Note: this seems to be the same bug as #653655.

Comment 1 Radek Vykydal 2011-06-01 14:21:11 UTC

Thank you for the report. We moved from libdhcp to NetworkManager in anaconda which made next-server dhcp parameter inaccessible. Instead, we are indeed using server-name option. I'll update the documentation.

Comment 2 Radek Vykydal 2011-10-07 12:28:52 UTC

Please we need this update update of the Installation Guide:

In section "14.10. Starting a Kickstart Installation of Installation Guide", the first paragraph of description of "ks" option should be changed to:

"If ks is used alone, the installation program configures the Ethernet card to use DHCP. The kickstart file is read from NFS server specified by DHCP option server-name. The name of the kickstart file is one of the following: "

Also, in section 14.8.2. Making the Kickstart File Available on the Network we need change the first example to:
"filename "/usr/new-machine/kickstart/"; next-server blarg.redhat.com; server-name blarg.redhat.com;"
and "next-server" should be replaced with "server-name" in the following paragraph.

Comment 3 Jack Reed 2011-10-20 01:42:31 UTC

Hi Radek,

Thanks for this. Your rewrite of the section 14.10 (now 15.10) paragraph has already been incorporated and can be seen in the draft version of the Fedora 16 guide - http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/Installation_Guide/index.html

As for the change to what is now section 15.8.2, that section has been completely rewritten for the Fedora 16 guide using the RHEL equivalent. The example you've asked to be edited is no longer there. 

Would you mind taking a look at the section via the above link and confirming whether it's satisfactory for Fedora 16 in its current form?

Thanks,

Jack

Comment 4 Radek Vykydal 2011-10-20 08:58:24 UTC

(In reply to comment #3)

> 
> Would you mind taking a look at the section via the above link and confirming
> whether it's satisfactory for Fedora 16 in its current form?

Yes it is, thanks.

Comment 5 Karsten Wade 2011-12-14 03:45:38 UTC

Removing myself for these bug components as I'm either no longer involved in that aspect of the project, or no longer care to watch this particular bug. Sorry if you are caught in a maelstrom of bug changes as a result!