Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 83816
Installer mishandles LVM /usr
Last modified: 2007-04-18 12:50:56 EDT
From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 Galeon/1.2.7 (X11; Linux i686; U;) Gecko/20021216 Description of problem: I ran a phoebe upgrade install on Redhat 8 with /usr mounted on an LVM volume. Anaconda installed a new /usr on / partition and copied all /usr files there. It then mounted the /usr in fstab (the LVM one) properly leaving all of the files copied to /usr invisable and an unstable system Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Didn't try Steps to Reproduce: 1.Create LVM VG and mount /usr one it in RH 8 2.Upgrade to phoebe 3. Actual Results: none of the files in /usr were upgraded and alot of disk space disappeared for the root volume Expected Results: the /usr in fstab should have been used in the upgrade Additional info:
This works for me here... could you attach your /etc/fstab?
Created attachment 89980 [details] fstab as requested
This is because your /usr is a jfs filesystem. We don't support jfs filesystems.
You do obviously support JFS in the kernel so in what way don't you support JFS?
In addition, even if you don't support JFS in anaconda, a fact that I didn't see documented anywhere, you couldn't have pick a worse choice for handling an unsupported filesystem. You just decide to ignore what was in fstab and without any user notification create a new /usr. Wouldn't it have been a much better choice to stop the installation and let the user decide what to do like you do for third party rpms?
It's not supported because it's not a filesystem type we allow you to create during the installation process. I'll fix this better in a future release, but for now am just sucking the jfs module onto the second stage and then it'll mount. It's still not a supported configuration, though.
If an upgrade installation runs to completion, you should deliver a stable working system. There must be something you can do to abort the installation if a system partition is on a jfs volume. Even if you can't read the volume in stage one, you can certainly read fstab so long as /etc isn't jfs. Secondly, isn't a missing /usr an exception that should be noticed. I know you can do better than creating a new partion and then mounting the jfs partion on top of it making it invisable and not notifying the user that anything is wrong.