Re: d-i daily build fails when building initrd (PowerMac7,3)
On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 12:10:56PM -0800, Shyamal Prasad wrote:
> Hi folks,
> I've been away from my computer for a few months, but decided to give
> the latest d-i netinstall daily build a spin today (March 26).
Please file a bug report, and don't just post here. I have been asked to take
a few weeks off so, you need to find someone else to investigate this with
> Besides the obvious known problem (default mirror) I find that a
> powerpc64 install on a PowerMac7,3 (Dual 2Ghz G5) fails when trying to
> install the kernel. Here is the tail end from the syslog
> Mar 26 19:22:08 base-installer: info: Found kernels 'linux-image-2.6.15-1-powerpc64,linux-image-2.6-powerpc64'
> Mar 26 19:22:08 base-installer: info: arch_kernel candidates: linux-image-2.6-powerpc64
> Mar 26 19:22:08 base-installer: info: arch_kernel: linux-image-2.6-powerpc64 (present)
> Mar 26 19:22:08 base-installer: info: Using kernel 'linux-image-2.6-powerpc64'
> Mar 26 19:22:08 base-installer: info: Setting do_initrd='yes'.
> Mar 26 19:22:08 base-installer: info: Setting link_in_boot='yes'.
> Mar 26 19:22:08 base-installer: info: Possible initramfs generator(s): 'initramfs-tools yaird'
> Mar 26 19:22:08 base-installer: info: Available initramfs generator(s): 'initramfs-tools'
> Mar 26 19:22:08 base-installer: error: exiting on error base-installer/initramfs/no-generator
> Mar 26 19:22:14 init: ^MStarting pid 1123, console /dev/vc/2: '/bin/sh'
> Also, when looking at the target disk it is clear that yaird is simply
> missing (which I'm assuming is the root cause...)
> ~$ ls /mnt/chroot/usr/sbin/y* /mnt/chroot/usr/sbin/mki*
> ls: /mnt/chroot/usr/sbin/mki*: No such file or directory
> /mnt/chroot/usr/sbin/yabootconfig /mnt/chroot/usr/sbin/ybin
Ok, but initramfs-tools is there, and is the default now anyway, so it should
work. There is clearly a bug in initramfs-tools about this issue, so file a
bug report against it, or ask maks on irc (#debian-kernel on irc.oftc.net).
> I looked in the installation reports and the errata and did not see
> this reported except for the cryptic errata saying "[21 Mar 06] Base
> installation will fail because of a script error."
> Since I've been away since December I thought I'd ask before filing a
> new bug: is this new/unknown? Or is it just me? Should I file an
> installation/bug report?
Please file an installation report, CCed to email@example.com.