Bug 642621 - plymouth %post fails during install
Summary: plymouth %post fails during install
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: plymouth
Version: 14
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
high
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ray Strode [halfline]
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-10-13 12:52 UTC by James Laska
Modified: 2013-09-02 06:52 UTC (History)
11 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of: 642557
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-08-16 20:14:40 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description James Laska 2010-10-13 12:52:48 UTC
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #642557 +++

Description of problem:
I initially saw this doing a full CD-based i386 install, selecting all packages. I was then able to replicate it with an i386 CD text install (requiring CDs 1 and 2), but not with an x86_64 CD text install (requiring only CD 1). The problem also does not show with an i386 DVD text install. The common thread seems to be whether more than one disc is used during install. I haven't tried a default x86_64 CD install yet.

When attempting to boot after the install, the messages

No root device found

Boot has failed, sleeping forever.

are displayed.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
F14 Final TC1

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Do a local (non-network) install requiring more than one CD.
2. Reboot afterwards.
  
Actual results:

No root device found

Boot has failed, sleeping forever.

Expected results:

Should boot normally.

Additional info:

At the end of install.log for an i386 DVD text install, I see the messages

Installing plymouth-scripts-0.8.4-0.20100823.4.fc14.i686
Installing plymouth-0.8.4-0.20100823.4.fc14.i686
Need 'inst' function, try setting PLYMOUTH_POPULATE_SOURCE_FUNCTIONS to a file that defines it
Installing dracut-006-2.fc14.noarch
Installing kernel-PAE-2.6.35.6-39.fc14.i686
W: Cannot load dracut module "plymouth", dependencies failed.
*** FINISHED INSTALLING PACKAGES ***

Similar messages appear in x86_64. Could this be related?

--- Additional comment from robatino on 2010-10-13 06:48:13 EDT ---

Should have mentioned that I've seen this both in VirtualBox and in KVM. Have not tested on bare metal.

--- Additional comment from harald on 2010-10-13 07:09:09 EDT ---

(In reply to comment #0)
> Installing plymouth-scripts-0.8.4-0.20100823.4.fc14.i686
> Installing plymouth-0.8.4-0.20100823.4.fc14.i686
> Need 'inst' function, try setting PLYMOUTH_POPULATE_SOURCE_FUNCTIONS to a file
> that defines it
> Installing dracut-006-2.fc14.noarch
> Installing kernel-PAE-2.6.35.6-39.fc14.i686
> W: Cannot load dracut module "plymouth", dependencies failed.
> *** FINISHED INSTALLING PACKAGES ***
> 
> Similar messages appear in x86_64. Could this be related?

Seems like the install of plymouth failed. No dracut is installed yet, and plymouth tries to do in %post:
/usr/libexec/plymouth/plymouth-generate-initrd

which then fails.

kernel does in %posttrans:
/sbin/new-kernel-pkg --package kernel --mkinitrd --dracut --depmod --update 2.6.35.4-12.fc14.x86_64 

which calls dracut, and dracut cannot find plymouth (because it failed to install in %post)

--- Additional comment from harald on 2010-10-13 07:13:45 EDT ---

(In reply to comment #0)
> W: Cannot load dracut module "plymouth", dependencies failed.

Although, this indicates, that the "crypt" module can't be loaded (which is a dep of the plymouth module).

The crypt module fails only if "cryptsetup" can't be found. So we have to check, if "cryptsetup-luks" was installed correctly.

--- Additional comment from rhe on 2010-10-13 07:16:09 EDT ---

Created attachment 453190 [details]
logs under /tmp after installation before reboot

I can also reproduce it using i386 discs. For the same default text install, x86_64 only requires one disc but i386 needs two: disc#1 and disc#2.

--- Additional comment from robatino on 2010-10-13 07:20:18 EDT ---

Should warn that in KVM split-media installs, bug 623126 causes mediacheck to fail on any disc that's bigger than the one originally booted from. Since i386 CD2 is smaller than CD1, that means that mediacheck should be okay when using the first two i386 CDs in a KVM install. VirtualBox isn't affected at all by this issue so it can handle more general tests.

--- Additional comment from harald on 2010-10-13 07:21:20 EDT ---

any install.log?

--- Additional comment from robatino on 2010-10-13 07:22:42 EDT ---

Created attachment 453193 [details]
install.log from i386 text install using CDs 1 and 2

--- Additional comment from robatino on 2010-10-13 07:23:20 EDT ---

Created attachment 453194 [details]
grub.conf from i386 text install using CDs 1 and 2

--- Additional comment from harald on 2010-10-13 07:26:06 EDT ---

no cryptsetup-luks .. hmm.. I might have to put it in the dracut requirements again.

--- Additional comment from harald on 2010-10-13 07:55:05 EDT ---

This patch is needed for dracut:

http://dracut.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=dracut/dracut;a=commitdiff;h=5cae1fe179faea815e5adcca71645367829aee01

--- Additional comment from harald on 2010-10-13 08:17:25 EDT ---

(In reply to comment #0)
> When attempting to boot after the install, the messages
> 
> No root device found
> 
> Boot has failed, sleeping forever.

Can you boot with "rdinfo rdshell quiet" on the kernel command line and make a screenshot of:

$ dmesg

--- Additional comment from harald on 2010-10-13 08:17:55 EDT ---

I mean a photo of the output of "dmesg"

--- Additional comment from harald on 2010-10-13 08:20:22 EDT ---

Installing dracut-006-2.fc14.noarch
Installing kernel-PAE-2.6.35.6-39.fc14.i686
W: Cannot load dracut module "plymouth", dependencies failed.
Installing lvm2-2.02.73-1.fc14.i686
*** FINISHED INSTALLING PACKAGES ***

Oh!!! lvm2 is installed after dracut has run???

%posttrans is supposed to run after _all_ transactions... weird!

--- Additional comment from harald on 2010-10-13 08:22:51 EDT ---

(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > When attempting to boot after the install, the messages
> > 
> > No root device found
> > 
> > Boot has failed, sleeping forever.
> 
> Can you boot with "rdinfo rdshell quiet" on the kernel command line and make a
> screenshot of:
> 
> $ dmesg

scratch that.. I guess there is no lvm in the initramfs...

--- Additional comment from jlaska on 2010-10-13 08:49:06 EDT ---

(In reply to comment #10)
> This patch is needed for dracut:
> 
> http://dracut.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=dracut/dracut;a=commitdiff;h=5cae1fe179faea815e5adcca71645367829aee01

Filed as bug#642617 - Add cryptsetup-luks to dracut requirements again

Comment 1 Harald Hoyer 2010-10-13 12:59:03 UTC
(In reply to comment #0)
> --- Additional comment from harald on 2010-10-13 07:09:09 EDT ---
> 
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > Installing plymouth-scripts-0.8.4-0.20100823.4.fc14.i686
> > Installing plymouth-0.8.4-0.20100823.4.fc14.i686
> > Need 'inst' function, try setting PLYMOUTH_POPULATE_SOURCE_FUNCTIONS to a file
> > that defines it
> > Installing dracut-006-2.fc14.noarch
> > Installing kernel-PAE-2.6.35.6-39.fc14.i686
> > W: Cannot load dracut module "plymouth", dependencies failed.
> > *** FINISHED INSTALLING PACKAGES ***
> > 
> > Similar messages appear in x86_64. Could this be related?
> 
> Seems like the install of plymouth failed. No dracut is installed yet, and
> plymouth tries to do in %post:
> /usr/libexec/plymouth/plymouth-generate-initrd
> 
> which then fails.

maybe plymouth should do plymouth-generate-initrd in %posttrans, but then we would do it twice... first for the kernel and a second time for plymouth.

Comment 2 Jesse Keating 2010-10-13 22:27:29 UTC
Not really sure why this bug was cloned off, the problem clearly is how the transactions work with split media, which is a pungi bug to make sure lvm gets on the first media along with kernel/dracut/etc..

James, can you explain why this was cloned?

Comment 3 James Laska 2010-10-14 12:15:29 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> James, can you explain why this was cloned?

I'll certainly try, however Harald may have more specifics to help clarify.  My understanding is that this issue was cloned and intended to track the plymouth  %script originally identified in bug#642557.  At the time this bug was cloned, the %script failures were thought to be independent of the root cause of split-media package order issue.

However, given we now know that bug#642557 can be resolved with a pungi change to ensure that lvm2 (along with several other packages) is included on disc1 of split-media, I'm not sure if the plymouth %script problem will remain.

Harald, did I miss anything here?

Comment 4 Harald Hoyer 2010-10-14 12:57:39 UTC
plymouth problem will stay...

Comment 5 Jesse Keating 2010-10-14 17:48:16 UTC
Can you clarify what the "plymouth problem" is?  I'm confused and I want to either reproduce or verify fixed this issue with the new isos I spun up.

Comment 6 Harald Hoyer 2010-10-15 06:56:36 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> Can you clarify what the "plymouth problem" is?  I'm confused and I want to
> either reproduce or verify fixed this issue with the new isos I spun up.

see comment #1

Comment 7 Jesse Keating 2010-10-15 18:52:03 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > Can you clarify what the "plymouth problem" is?  I'm confused and I want to
> > either reproduce or verify fixed this issue with the new isos I spun up.
> 
> see comment #1

Instead of running it %posttrans, you could also have plymouth have Requires(post): dracut (et al) and that will ensure that dracut and the like are put into the transaction set prior to plymouth is.

This "problem" should largely go away with the pungi change I made, so this is certainly not something that has to be worried about for F14.

Comment 8 Fedora End Of Life 2012-08-16 20:14:44 UTC
This message is a notice that Fedora 14 is now at end of life. Fedora 
has stopped maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 14. It is 
Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no 
longer maintained.  At this time, all open bugs with a Fedora 'version'
of '14' have been closed as WONTFIX.

(Please note: Our normal process is to give advanced warning of this 
occurring, but we forgot to do that. A thousand apologies.)

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, feel free to reopen 
this bug and simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version.

Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we were unable to fix it before Fedora 14 reached 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 to click on 
"Clone This Bug" (top right of this page) and open it against that 
version of Fedora.

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.

The process we are following is described here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.