Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 476384
New install from dvd lacks components
Last modified: 2013-01-09 23:58:37 EST
Description of problem:After a new installation of FC10 from the live cd, /usr/lib/rpm, rpm-config, rpmrc and pulseaudio modules are missing. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 2.6.27.5-117.fc10.x86_64 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1.Try to run rhythmbox 2.Run yum update in hopes of fixing rhythmbox/pulseaudio 3.Run rpm -q --qf "%{SOURCERPM}\n" -f /bin/mount to see what ails yum Actual results:No music and no updates. See attached file. Expected results: The sweet sounds of a Bach Cantata as I explored the wonders of Fedora 10 Additional info:1 Architecture is an AMD 64x2 4850e on a Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H 2 I had a freeze while trying to install Fedora with the live cd (see bug #43870), and used the workaround in that bug report. 3 The live cd checksum was ok
What are the contents of /var/log/anaconda* ? This sounds like a bad CD or copy. (What's the other bug # you were referencing -- it's missing a digit)
Created attachment 327008 [details] /sdb10/var/log/anaconda.log
Created attachment 327009 [details] sdb10/var/log/anaconda.syslog
Created attachment 327010 [details] /sdb10/var/log/anaconda.xlog
Created attachment 327011 [details] /SDB12/var/log/anaconda.log
Created attachment 327012 [details] /SDB12/var/log/anaconda.syslog
Created attachment 327013 [details] /SDB12/var/log/anaconda.xlog
Created attachment 327015 [details] rpm-spyware?
If this is not a bug, please accept my apologies Need real name? What's wrong with my name?
I've been through all my browser histories, and I can't find that bug number. However, the advice I followed was: "When the dvd install process freezes, use Alt + F2, login as root, run drakx11, accepting all default setings, then close. Then run service -f dm, install to HD, then check xorg.conf." In fact, I copied the xorg.conf from my fedora 9 (which was already copied from debian and modified). X and gnome work ok, so this isn't the problem.
Created attachment 327044 [details] yum backtrace
I thought I might solve my problem in this way: I copied my first fc 10 installation (sdb10) into another partition, sdb13. (cp gave a swag of unknown file type and cannot stat: no such file or directory errors, all in /usr/lib and /etc) I rm -r 'd the whole /usr/lib directory and copied a new version from the second installation (sdb12), which was more complete, and copied individually the few /etc directories and files. After editing grub.conf the third version booted ok. However running yum repolist gave: error: Unable to open /usr/lib/rpm/rpmrc for reading: Not a directory. And [cam@cwpc ~]$ ls -l /usr/lib/rpm ?--------- 65299 256 5677 117440512 1969-08-16 23:51 /usr/lib/rpm [cam@cwpc ~]$ which is what I got on the first installation. Yet the /usr/lib/rpm directory which I copied has 10 items in it, and permissions 755; and so did the sdb13 installation before booting. I'll try downloading another live dvd. I attach the backtrace from yum
(In reply to comment #1) > What are the contents of /var/log/anaconda* ? > > This sounds like a bad CD or copy. (What's the other bug # you were > referencing -- it's missing a digit) 1 OOPS Like an idiot, I've been saying cd when I meant dvd. 2 cam@cwpc:/$ sha1sum /dev/cdrom f1e5ae7db6a1ba227de7294c4112385922388648 /dev/cdrom -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 f1e5ae7db6a1ba227de7294c4112385922388648 *Fedora-10-x86_64-DVD.iso As you can see, they match
Can you explain exactly which steps you took in installation? To me, it looks like you grabbed a installation DVD and then additionally checked or added a remote repo that contains Fedora packages. The remote repo took precedence but wasn't a complete repo so the RPM package wasn't downloaded. Your install continued but was missing that package, and you ended up with a broken install. Does that sound about right?
Sorry, but I can't say exactly what steps I took. It was a while ago, and I didn't write everything down, as I was expecting it to 'just work' as the Fedora 9 installation did. I _think_ on the second install attempt I just used the defaults. I ended up comparing the /etc and /usr directories and adding the missing bits to the second install. I wouldn't bother for myself, as I have now got a working FC 10, but if you are really interested I still have the disc I used and I could do another install on a freshly formatted partition to see what that gives.
I've been unable to reproduce this issue, so I am going to close it as WORKSFORME. In addition, I have not heard from our QA guys about this problem, which means a fair amount of testing has happened here without running into it. If you can reliably reproduce it in the future, feel free to reopen and we can try to investigate.