Bug#340390: marked as done (Installation report: no disks detected)
Your message dated Mon, 5 Dec 2005 06:41:47 +0100
with message-id <20051205054147.GF13271@djedefre.onera>
and subject line Bug#340390: Installation report: disk detected with daily build
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Nov 2005 06:59:55 +0000
>From RossBoylan@stanfordalumni.org Tue Nov 22 22:59:55 2005
Return-path: <RossBoylan@stanfordalumni.org>
Received: from mail0.rawbw.com ([198.144.192.41])
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
id 1Eeobj-0004S3-M5
for submit@bugs.debian.org; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:59:55 -0800
Received: from wheat.betterworld.us (m201-14.dsl.tsoft.com [198.144.201.14])
by mail0.rawbw.com (8.11.6p2/8.11.6) with ESMTP id jAN6xsL85250;
Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:59:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ross by wheat.betterworld.us with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 1Eeobh-00016Q-00; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:59:53 -0800
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:59:52 -0800
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Cc: Ross Boylan <RossBoylan@stanfordalumni.org>
Subject: Installation report: no disks detected
Message-ID: <20051123065952.GB4092@wheat.betterworld.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
From: Ross Boylan <RossBoylan@stanfordalumni.org>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
Package: installation-reports
Boot method: CD
Image version: etch beta1 http://cdimage.debian.org/pub/cdimage-testing/etch_d-i/i386/beta1/debian-testing-i386-netinst.iso
Date: 2005-11-22 22:00 Pacific
Machine: OmniPro Intel System
Processor: P4 630 3GHz
Memory: 2G
Partitions: one DOS parition from Win98 installer Fdisk
Output of lspci and lspci -n: ? sorry
Base System Installation Checklist:
[O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it
Initial boot worked: [O]
Configure network HW: [O?]
Config network: [ ] cable not connected; skipped
Detect CD: [O]
Load installer modules: [?]
Detect hard drives: [E]
Partition hard drives: [ ]
Create file systems: [ ]
Mount partitions: [ ]
Install base system: [ ]
Install boot loader: [ ]
Reboot: [ ]
Comments/Problems:
The installer did not detect any hard drives. I suspect this has
something to do with the motherboard, which I think is relatively new:
Intel D945PSNLK. One 250GB WD SATA hard drive. The block diagram
shows that the Intel 945P chipset controls the drive via the Intel
82801G hub.
Still, I thought this was pretty generic; I'm a bit surprised there
was a problem. The vendor did say the hardware should work with
Linux.
The system also has a floppy and and DVD/CD drive; I booted off the
latter.
fdisk /dev/hda when I shelled out reported it couldn't find the device.
It's a new machine.
I was a little surprised to see a reference to devfs in some of the
material that flew by. Other messages suggested a 2.6 kernel; I
thought it used udev, not devfs.
I gave this a shot because my initial Win98 installation got hung up.
The Win98 installer did detect and partition the hard drive, though
the reported size (40G) was much smaller than the actual size (250G).
I manually create one 6G partition at the start. The Win98 install
hung up before I got to format the partition.
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 340390-done) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Dec 2005 06:53:49 +0000
>From christian.perrier@onera.fr Sun Dec 04 22:53:49 2005
Return-path: <christian.perrier@onera.fr>
Received: from onera.onera.fr ([144.204.65.4])
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
id 1EjAEP-00007I-IO
for 340390-done@bugs.debian.org; Sun, 04 Dec 2005 22:53:49 -0800
Received: from cc-mykerinos.onera (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by onera.onera.fr with ESMTP id jB56rlQR019952;
Mon, 5 Dec 2005 07:53:47 +0100 (MET)
Received: by cc-mykerinos.onera (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 086E740A291; Mon, 5 Dec 2005 06:41:47 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 06:41:47 +0100
From: Christian Perrier <bubulle@debian.org>
To: Ross Boylan <RossBoylan@stanfordalumni.org>, 340390-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#340390: Installation report: disk detected with daily build
Message-ID: <20051205054147.GF13271@djedefre.onera>
References: <20051123065952.GB4092@wheat.betterworld.us> <[🔎] 20051204062342.GJ13271@djedefre.onera> <[🔎] 20051204233934.GA22772@wheat.betterworld.us> <[🔎] 200512050101.16724.aragorn@tiscali.nl> <[🔎] 20051205003236.GD22772@wheat.betterworld.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 20051205003236.GD22772@wheat.betterworld.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
Quoting Ross Boylan (RossBoylan@stanfordalumni.org):
> > Did you install Etch or Sid?
> I thought the daily build was etch, but I don't know.
Aha, confusinng matter..:-)
Frans question is: when you were prompted for a mirror, you may have
been prompted to install "Stable", "Testing" or "Unstable", just after
choosing the mirror.
If you did choose "Testing", then you're likely to run into problems.
If you were'nt prompted, this is because the question is medium
priority and you were running the installer at high priority (the default).
> apt is getting packages from testing.
>
> The kernel after (successful) reboot is 2.6.12-1-686 Sep 27
So, it seems that installing testing works..:-). However, it probably
works with netinst images...not sure about netboot images (the small
ISO images one can easily build with D-I sources).
I think we can safely close the bug report now.
Reply to: