Description of problem: LVM installation on 2 disks of an existing 3 disk RAID5 LVM installation. Version-Release number of selected component: anaconda-21.48.3-1 The following was filed automatically by anaconda: anaconda 21.48.3-1 exception report Traceback (most recent call first): File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/parted/disk.py", line 213, in commit return self.__disk.commit() File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/parted/decorators.py", line 41, in new ret = fn(*args, **kwds) File "/tmp/updates/blivet/formats/disklabel.py", line 270, in commit self.partedDisk.commit() File "/tmp/updates/blivet/devices.py", line 1796, in _destroy self.disk.originalFormat.commit() File "/tmp/updates/blivet/devices.py", line 946, in destroy self._destroy() File "/tmp/updates/blivet/deviceaction.py", line 342, in execute self.device.destroy() File "/tmp/updates/blivet/devicetree.py", line 354, in processActions action.execute() File "/tmp/updates/blivet/__init__.py", line 354, in doIt self.devicetree.processActions() File "/tmp/updates/blivet/__init__.py", line 214, in turnOnFilesystems storage.doIt() File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pyanaconda/install.py", line 178, in doInstall turnOnFilesystems(storage, mountOnly=flags.flags.dirInstall) File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/threading.py", line 766, in run self.__target(*self.__args, **self.__kwargs) File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/pyanaconda/threads.py", line 227, in run threading.Thread.run(self, *args, **kwargs) IOException: Partition(s) 1 on /dev/sdb have been written, but we have been unable to inform the kernel of the change, probably because it/they are in use. As a result, the old partition(s) will remain in use. You should reboot now before making further changes. Additional info: addons: com_redhat_kdump cmdline: /usr/bin/python /sbin/anaconda cmdline_file: BOOT_IMAGE=/ppc/ppc64/vmlinuz inst.vnc inst.sshd ip=9.5.178.25::9.5.178.1:255.255.255.0:ppc64lehamzytest2.rch.stglabs.ibm.com:eth0:none nameserver=9.5.175.8 bootdev=eth0 inst.updates=http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates/updates-1109244.1.img executable: /sbin/anaconda hashmarkername: anaconda kernel: 3.16.1-301.fc21.ppc64le product: Fedora-Server release: Cannot get release name. type: anaconda version: 21 Potential duplicate: bug 973747
Created attachment 938216 [details] File: anaconda-tb
Created attachment 938217 [details] File: anaconda.log
Created attachment 938218 [details] File: environ
Created attachment 938219 [details] File: lsblk_output
Created attachment 938220 [details] File: nmcli_dev_list
Created attachment 938221 [details] File: os_info
Created attachment 938222 [details] File: program.log
Created attachment 938223 [details] File: storage.log
Created attachment 938224 [details] File: syslog
Created attachment 938225 [details] File: ifcfg.log
Created attachment 938226 [details] File: packaging.log
Another user experienced a similar problem: Install over a previous installation addons: com_redhat_kdump cmdline: /usr/bin/python /sbin/anaconda cmdline_file: BOOT_IMAGE=/ppc/ppc64/vmlinuz inst.vnc inst.sshd ip=9.5.178.25::9.5.178.1:255.255.255.0:ppc64lehamzytest2.rch.stglabs.ibm.com:eth0:none nameserver=9.5.175.8 bootdev=eth0 hashmarkername: anaconda kernel: 3.16.2-301.fc21.ppc64le package: anaconda-21.48.6-1 product: Fedora" reason: IOException: Partition(s) 3 on /dev/sdb have been written, but we have been unable to inform the kernel of the change, probably because it/they are in use. As a result, the old partition(s) will remain in use. You should reboot now before making further changes. release: Cannot get release name. version: Fedora
I think this may be a case of old metadata making something (lvm? udev rule?) grab a hold of the device long enough to cause problems.
I was unable to reproduce the initial problem, but probably because not sure to use same setup environment: * I started with a ppc64 guest initially installed with default LVM using three qcow2 disk files. * Then tried an install ppc64 guest selecting only three of two qcow2 disk files. * The install succeeded with fedora fc21 Beta RC2. * I did not tried with ppc64le because solution of bug 1109244/bug 1161280 are not yet in fedora fc21 Beta release.
with new fc21 pre-GA TC1 iso (that embeded the correction of bug 1109244) I redo the test with ppc64le archi (not done in comment #14): default install (with LVM) a ppc64le guest selecting two qcow2 disks from a previous 3 disks LVM guest. Not sure this is the same scenario as described in initial description. The install completed without error, and the guest rebooted successfully. Could we conclude that this bug is able to be closed with current release ?
This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database. Reassigning to the new owner of this component.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 21 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 21. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '21'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 21 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
Fedora 21 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2015-12-01. Fedora 21 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.