Bug 751587

Summary:	Install with software raid does not boot (with /boot on an MD volume)
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell>
Component:	anaconda	Assignee:	Anaconda Maintenance Team <anaconda-maint-list>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	16	CC:	anaconda-maint-list, jonathan, vanmeeuwen+fedora
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	x86_64
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2011-11-08 01:19:33 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 Gregory Maxwell 2011-11-06 00:25:06 UTC

Description of problem:

Installing F16 (RC5) x86_64 from USB onto a system with two SATA disk, configured several partition, and raid devices for each partition. 

When install completed after reboot I was greeted by No such device <uuid> then the grub rescue prompt.  And ls (hd0,0) etc. just gives me no such partition. I didn't know what more I could troubleshoot from there.

This is the same setup I've used on many F12/F13/F14 systems (I skipped F15)

I tried several times with no luck.

But #fedora-qa was helpful enough to show me the test case for SW raid installs: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Partitioning_On_Software_RAID

It appears that it directs the user to make a non-raid /boot.  Thats pretty nuts: if my system dies and I lose boot I won't be able to boot!  Makes the raid kinda pointless (okay, it might reduce data loss, but thats what backups are for).

So I really hope fedora hasn't dropped support for this, but at least if it has then the installer shouldn't let you try to configure it!

After switching to a non-raid /boot it worked fine.

Comment 1 Brian Lane 2011-11-08 01:19:33 UTC


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 750794 ***