Bug#432314: installation-report: LILO Installation Fails on Machine with 4 SATA Disks
reassign 432314 lilo-installer 1.20
thanks
On Monday 09 July 2007 13:12, Youssef Eldakar wrote:
> Installing on a machine with 4 SATA disks proceeds smoothly until it
> reaches the LILO boot loader installation.
First of all a little side note. lilo is pretty much deprecated (grub is
preferred and more actively maintained) and very little maintained. Also,
both XFS and JFS are not all that common and it is entirely possible that
there are issues with those combinations.
The only reason you are getting lilo is that grub does not support XFS.
AFAIK grub _does_ support JFS, so I guess you must be selecting lilo
manually there? Does grub work correctly for JFS?
To get these issues fixed, someone who has a stake in solving them will
have to do some serious debugging, especially if the cause is in the lilo
package itself. We can have a little go at it though.
> The boot loader installation
> screen offers the choice to install LILO on /dev/sdd or /dev/sda5, the
> root partition. It seems odd that the installer offers /dev/sdd as a
> choice in place of /dev/sda.
I have no idea how that would happen after checking the script. To find
out what is happening here, we'd need some debugging output:
- boot the installer
- when you get to partitioning, switch to VT2
- use 'nano' to edit /var/lib/dpkg/info/lilo-installer.postinst
- add a line 'set -x' below the second line; save and exit
- switch back to VT1 and continue the installation
Send us the syslog for the installation after that (gzipped!).
> Regardless, attempting to install on
> /dev/sdd, /dev/sda5, or /dev/sda by typing it in the "other choice"
> dialog fails with a warning in syslog: "configuring lilo-installer
> failed with error code 1."
Different issue.
At that point there should at least be a /target/etc/lilo.conf.
Is that indeed there and are the contents correct?
Please send us the file.
> Switching to a shell, I indeed see no sbin/lilo and no etc/lilo.conf
> under /target.
The actual failure is during the installation of the lilo package. In that
case this is pretty strange as one of the first things to happen is that
the package gets unpacked, which means that those files _should_ be
there.
Again, the syslog should tell us more. Please do your test entering
'/dev/sda' as the location to install lilo.
Cheers,
FJP
Reply to: