Bug 859 - need summary
Summary: need summary
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: rhl-ig-x86
Version: 5.2
Hardware: i386
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Sandra Moore
QA Contact:
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 1999-01-18 02:54 UTC by donn
Modified: 2014-08-04 22:22 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2000-03-22 22:00:16 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description donn 1999-01-18 02:54:16 UTC
Mostly a FYI bug:
I installed on a brand new, never before used, disk.
(I mean NEVER used, which is critical.)  (On C:, that
is the primary drive address.)

After the installation completed, LILO couldn't boot
to Linux; it turns out that no partition on that disk was
marked bootable.  When the installer runs, it should
mark the partition bootable (or at least ask if it should),
so that something comes up.  (I don't at this point
remember the exact message, but I do remember that it
was unhelpful in figuring this out; obviously I finally
did, but it was painful.)

(It's not unreasonable that the best fix for this is
mostly, if not totally, documentation.)

Donn Terry

P.S. I installed the system on a new PCChips M577
mainboard, with the "features" of ChipAway Virus and
PC-cillin97.  One or both of those thinks that LILO is
a virus (didn't track down which, just turned off the
checking in the BIOS setup).  (There's some irony
about LILO being a virus :-) ).

Comment 1 David Lawrence 1999-01-18 23:31:59 UTC
I was unable to get the system to fail to boot. But the installer does
not mark the partition containing the /boot directory as active as it
probably should. This leads to believe that certain hardware
combinations can cause the system to fail to boot and some don't. I am
assigning it to a developer for further review.

Comment 2 Matt Wilson 1999-03-13 21:39:59 UTC
Fixed in next release.

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